Full text of "Pantheism: The Light and Hope of Modern Reason"

See other formats

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I

f 'from the iibb'ary ok

ROBERT MARK -WESLEY

FRCTEIIOR UT PHItomPHV
L Iftjfi — 19BJ

i GIFT or ms WItDSEH

L. TV THE liNIVCRSl TY OFMItHtf.AN ^

ti™B>.UJ i,K rt J ,

r. - -

X> I-
2 2

y ■

o • • •
v/

. » > ■>■ .

■ <

•■■■ "I

.>,■' / .' .-•

•f .^>' •-

s- ->

v ^' /K ..... .

j' V ■ /- .Vv - ;vv.

.,.,■. pr

..■•. .- \.

~y .--■ -~ .

<'v'/ ^/>.-v^ ■•/:■:'. ^"-^ -jr .

-■' ■.•■ A./\v

:.;:.v.:.j---.,-y^-,

>,. . .v.^

,- >.

_N ••\S , ,» • . -

) :\

;^<.V'-

'r-[r:,,::^.?:^ ^ ^? •;

^.-r

;> 1 ■ y

=-"•-:• ■';.^ ; '^^^^-v^ :■'.':>:. -vjv^., rry^'-'

C ',

-, ' - ,'\ • *

J /^. ■;-

. N

^ - '.

■; t '■: >'.-x ' ; .

■ / ■

'/v:l./

■>',

'/<' .--^\

^.. >

•» ^:>'-,' ;•

'. , , ■■' ■-

( '■ •"

■■.. .■.•-, / ,. , ■-. '■-'■

. : - "... : ' J

- ■"-;■" -yVv' Vv>::^. s;.:''^ -.-r^>:V.:.-^^ A-rv'^ '■•■;':. -.'^-V'^.-; .\-"\r'-^< ,>'

•■■■, ■ :. ' 'i ■ . '. '■■.,,'-,--■-'...'''. .:<■->.■ •<„ \.~ ^^ ■' ■// , ,'• '. ■•■-.; ,-',;■ - >---'-.■ ■

'.--•<- '-. ' •- , ■ - ■.-,-">>> ; . , f ;, .• .:* . , --I ■'....--/'--. , - ^ . . ,, ■ ■'- ■'.^

■ - - ' "'>' r ■.--■■,-•■■■'.-■ ■ V "• .'-.<•-•/- .-•-; - -, • - , r-. ■' ' -■ ,.--■-

■-■"' . .■■ ^A -—,.,-:/•- . ^/ ' ) • . — - .-- c . ^^ . i ■ i .'

' . ;r> /;'^ V:

: ■ .. - . ,>■'■. .VX ;/- '■•■- , <; :v'-''' ' .■• ■"■ ■■(

-■; :;,:.■

r' >■

t-'.

^ ,.

\jyyJUi^yA^

C . n^v^-T^

■»

PANTHEISM,

THE

LIGHT AND HOPE OF MODERN

REASON.

C. AMRYC

1898.

Copyrighted, 1898,

C. AMRYC.

■ I «

'2' - 10 3f

PREFACE.

^ No book, up to recent date, has treated Pantheism as con-

sistently as it deserves to be treated; some old "material-
ists" were Pantheists, but they did not have data enough
at that time to make the logic fully consistent. Panthe-
ism is no creed, it is a logic, it makes absolutely no de-
mand upon "belief." What is not logical is rejected, what
is logical to-day is accepted; no matter, whether it was un-
logical a thousand years ago or will be illogical a thousand
years hence; we are only responsible for our times; no an-
cestor rule or progenity enslavement. The Pantheism in
this book, while, of course, expressing the author^s view,
probably expresses also the views of nine-tenths of what is
popularly termed "modern science" as far as embodied in
investigators and scientific philosophers among Caucasians
and Mongolians. Those who feel offended by some neces-
sary justification of our course as Pantheists, will please
treat us with the same toleration with which we treat them.
The author had lived for years most conscientiously within
the most orthodox Christianity, had for the time being ac-
cepted and practised all its tenets and laws; may others
do the same in regard to Pantheism before judging.

The author has not chosen his examples from one nation
or tribe. Keligion, which is only another name for Domi-
nant 'Ideals and speculation about beings other than man
and higher, is not confined by national boundaries. If Pan-
theism is a true logic, it tnust be applicable to all races;
it must not be confined to the thin thread of a small tribe,
but embrace all humanity, must even go beyond and ex-
tend, in our faint childish way, a .sign of recognition to
all sentient beings, higher and lower in our entire universe;
for, it is not unreasonable to suppose that every planet and
star in our universe is peopled by beings of proper chemical
constitution suited to it; some enormously higher than we
are, others as much lower.

Personally the author, unfortunately, is better developed
in purely intellectual than emotional direction; may others
better equipped follow out the lines of art, beauty, love,
hatred, as viewed from a Pantheistic aspect. Although our
own private experiences are the only true ones, the author
has striven to avoid the odious "P' in the book. For some
years the subject of this book has been collected and re-
vised. If repetitions seem to occur, they were used pur-
posely to introduce an important subject from an amplify-
ing different standpoint. As much as possible popular lan-
guage has been employed; only frauds make up by a hurri-
cane of noise and words what they lack in ideas; a few simple
words it was found necessary to coin.

Chapters of varying grades of depth, speculation and
practical application have been collected, so that many de-
grees of intellect may find something congenial; while: Ego
Brain, Phases of Pantheos, Human Equation, Liberty, Jus-
tice, etc., may satisfy the philosopher; Family, Life's Joys
and Pains, Heroes and Martyrs, written in thoroughly popu-
lar style, may be understood by anybody. Even in a bodily
meal we like to eat relishes, light dishes with our steaks and
other pieces de resistance; why should we feed our souls
on nothing but the heavy fried salt pork of solid, soggy
logic and not enjoy a diversified logical repast composed of
heavy dishes well prepared and light ones just spiced enough
with the predominating flavor (Pantheism) to make them
homogeneous and digestible.

May the reader be as much benefitted by reading the book,
as it benefitted while being written

THE AUTHOR.

PANTHEISM,

THE LIGHT AND HOPE OF MODERN

REASON.

PROCESSES OF THINKING AND REASONING.

As a fitting introduction into a realm in which thought
plays the most important part, it might appear profitable
to attempt to harmonize our modes of thinking with those
of our readers.

A thought, pure and simple, is an unspoken phrase.
Hence, as the phrase was born by long generations of ex-
perience, observation, language, even philosophy, our
thoughts must partake of all the historic elements of speech
up to the nerve impulse for speech.

All our thoughts are the accumulations of long ances-
tral experiences; the simplest one uses observations thou-
sands of years old, transmitted through sauriandom — ape-
dom — ^and savagery. Every thought has a cause for aris-
ing; sometimes it is from outward — ^impression, sometimes
from inward — ^impulse; all thoughts are the product of pre-
vious thoughts combined with new impressions upon our
senses. Man has seven well defined senses: Sight, hearing,
taste, smell, sense of temperature, of weight (touch) and of
sex; through these we receive all impressions. Take sight:
Up to our retinaa the impressions upon our eyes are objec-
tive, physical, mechanical; at the retinae the impressions
become subjective; our eyes up to the retinae are simple
objective optical apparatus with only such laws as govern
inanimate physics. In correct use of the word, the im-
pression on our retina is the "fact" of an occurrence or

object seen; similar with the other senses and nerves; up to
the nerves the impressions are the "facts/^ In common
life as in the expression "is it not a fact, etc.?" the word
is used erroneously instead of "indisputable truth." As
soon as the "fact" passes beyond the retina into our brains
it becomes a thought. Hence "fact'^ in logical use of the
word should not be used to denote the occurrence but the
first impression of the occurrence upon our nerve ends.
Thus, to the person bom blind, light is not a "fact," how-
ever much he may hear people proclaim it, it is to him
an inference of logic, a thought figment or perhaps "thought-
fact," which he deducts from other people^s talk. Many
a blind person, when cured later, tells that light appeared
to him, while blind, like something that would make a pe-
culiar noise in his eyes or tickle them in a peculiar man-
ner; the first beam of light is to them a positive painful
blow. The waves of molecules which we call "light" would
exist, even if we had no eyes, but their existence would not
be a "fact" to us until we could obtain a direct or indirect
impression from them upon our senses. Just because we
have no electric sense, can we not tell at all what it is,
we are an electrically blind race and have to surmise its
real qualities, because we only perceive it when it is no
longer electricity. We do not see or hear the electricity
in the lightning only the light and thunder produced by
it; we cannot perceive directly the electric current in a wire;
the electric shock is not different from the effect of any
proper blow upon the nerves (crazy bone).

Hence, the proper use of the word "fact" is its applica-
tion to the first impression upon our senses, not to the oc-
currence itself which causes this impression; this "fact" from
the retina onward travels a nerve path of great complexity,
it becomes a thought, is then compared with other first im-
pressions or "facts" and from this comparison results as a
logical deduction a pronounced account of the fact, e. i.
not of the occurrence but of the impression of the occur-
rence upon our retinaB, if an object seen is described.

If I tell a friend: "I saw a shooting star," I do not tell
him any fact; the seeing is a fact only within my own brains,
what I tell is only a deduction, comparison, a logical thought.
We see something; to tell what we see we have to compare

the fact or first impression with words — ^words are "ear
facts^^ — ^matching this fact, we have to find a more or less
accurate language match for our visual fact and therefore
tell only comparisons. Hence all our conversation, writing,
expression, is only a more or less complex series of deduc-
tions, inferences, comparisons; briefly, of thoughts, but never
of "facts/'

This shows the difficulty of accurate truthful intercourse
between men; for, you hear what I say, you compare from
your ear, in which the sound of my words — ^not the ideas —
constitute the "fact,'* these sounds with the ideas corre-
sponding to them in your brains; you find that they match
different shades from what I intended to match and you
immediately think me a prevaricator. Hence, the first re-
quirement of good logic is as perfect an agreement on the
meaning of words as can be reached.

Even dictionaries, often constructed under the dominion
and bias of some superstition and stupidly reaching out for
simple cash popularity, frequently cater to the popular con-
fusion of ideas in the meaning of words and actually (even
Webster) declare sometimes two kinds of spellings, pronun-
ciations or definitions as correct — ^a dead heat of mistakes!

The process of reasoning one thought from preceding
thoughts is fairly uniform in different normal people; their
general agreement constitutes what are called logics.

The second most important requirement of good logic is
its constant connection with facts. A person who reasons
from thought upon thought may be sure to be entirely wrong
in the fourth or fifth step from the original fact which started
the thought (St. Augustine, Thomas de Kempis, Hume,
Kant), while the person who, at every following logical
thought, weaves in a new "fact" from his brain is far more
liable to be right (Darwin, Haeckel, Spencer).

A third requirement of good logic is not to 'Relieve."
The word is not logical in its correct sense, namely that of
acceptance of anything equal to a fact merely because some-
body said so. If T say: "Do you believe that the city of
Taganrog exists?'' I put a trick question. T beg the answer.
You see on a map of Russia near the Black Sea a little circle
labelled Taganrog; you know what all this means, you have
no reason to suppose that the map maker to fool you put

there that name; you open the map at Illinois, find there
Peoria, Golconda, Kankakee, Chicago, etc., denoted by little
circles in a similar manner, you know those cities exist, you
have been there; hence, you conclude that the overwhelming
preponderance of logic proves that somewhere in Russia,
where this mark is found, the town of Taganrog exists. This
mark on the map is as full and powerful an evidence as your
visiting the city. Hence you are convinced that Taganrog
exists and, if you answer: "Yes, I believe it," you are merely
guilty of a slightly wrong use of the word "believe;" you
should say, "1 am convinced/^ because good proof has been
brought forward and proof convinces, while it has little to
do with belief. You may "believe" that John Smith is
honest, here the word is appropriate, because no proofs were
brought to convince you, merely no proofs yet that he is
dishonest. You may "believe" that Christ was God, or may
be "convinced" that Christ was God, the shading between
the two is well marked. In belief we silently acknowledge
a bowing of our logic and conviction to some powerful or
better authority who does our thinking, in "being convinced"
we are our own critical authority, hence logical.

In good logic we have to realize that our brains consti-
tute within us always a majority against the brains of the
entire world. We saw a tree blown down. What does it
matter if nobody "believes" us, we have the facts, all others
have only dreams, thoughts, "beliefs?"

One of the common defects of logic especially as repre-
sented in arguments, dissertations, writings, etc., is unclear
subject of discussion, purposes and issues not clearly de-
fined. Why do we want to reason a certain point? Does
A consider the intellect, soul or brain of B worth winning
over to his views? If so, our reasoning is a propaganda argu-
ment. Or, does A want to defend his views against the at-
tacks of B or fight for his (A's) own justification? If so,
we are arguing for the sake of self-improvement; or, finally,
do A and B merely want to wrestle intellectually for superi-
ority without special regard for the logical subject? In the
latter case reasoning becomes a tournament of brains with
the ganglia as knights and the Egos as audience if only the
two disputants are present. The second purpose impresses
the author as the most worthy, exalted; if A improves him-

eelf, he cannot fail to improve B; if B, however, is stronger,
A will silently correct his errors; the first purpose partakes
of elements of domineering; the third purpose, of elements
of vanity and desired applause. Inaccurate language as an
impediment to good logic needs no amplification. How can
we dispute or argue successfully if we do not state our
thoughts and logical chains in terms accepted by silent agree-
ment of the most competent logicians? We will be like
men yelling at each other in foreign tongues who think
each other deaf, confound tonguetiedness with lack of hear-
ing, and try to make up for a translation by loudness of the
shouts.

Many people do not store properly the foundation facts
received, they classify and match them wrong and there-
fore, when arguing, present these facts in forms not normal
or acceptable by normal people; this defect may be termed
lack of competency, especially if entire groups of facts nec-
essary to the argument in question are lacking and their
place be taken by a presentation of thought-heaps of more
or less rickety nature.

Correct logic demands the succession of thoughts in a
chain or rather a sound unbroken line; hence, the person
who only presents ravelled ends, freaky jumps, thought
strings tied together by clumsy knots, is a poor reasoner;
perfect logic is always of such a quality that the final re-
sult of several thoughts is identical with the best form of
the intermediate primary facts. Why is (8-^4X6+30)^7
— 1=5 a perfect chain of logic? Because the last result (5)
is identical, although the product was obtained by thoughts,
with that which we would have observed as *^facts," had we
seen somebody take eight peas, divide them into four piles,
take six of these piles, add thirty more peas, divide the whole
mass into seven parts and take one pea from one part; there
would remain in that last portion five peas. We can only
jump immaterial, generally agreed thoughts in our line of
argument without becoming illogical or confusing; any un-
" usual train must be clearly enounced. Thus, if we say to
an astronomer: "The transit of Venus of 1874 occurred ten
seconds sooner than expected; therefore, the distance of the
sun is greater than previously measured/^ no important jump
has been taken in this logical train of thoughts among as-

tronomers; they know the five hundred thoughts which be-
long between ^'expected" and "therefore;" their omission is
as natural to them as Ig. 2:^^.3. . . ; but, talking rationally
with a layman we would hafe to put for about two hours
logical trains of thoughts between the "expected" and "there-
fore" to present a logical sequence. Illogicality is the in-
sertion of a train of thought based upon facts different than
those started from, yet claimed to belong to the starting
group. Inconsistency is the use of different trains of
thoughts applied to subjects requiring in true logic similar
sequences of thought.

Every train of pure logic is spoiled by the intro-
duction of sentiment. Pure sentiment is the^ thinking
of our bodies while pure logic belongs to our souls.
The body is far behind the soul, his thinking is childish,
savage, brutal, selfish, hence his thoughts, which we call
sentiments, are inferior to those of the far more advanced
soul; the nerves of our bodies constitute as complete a sys-
tem as those of our souls (brains); they think, reason, feel
and act; they give the sentiments while the brain nerves
give logic and reason.

Thus, we once spoke of Darwin's theory, a young woman
said: "I never shall believe it. Just think how awful to
•have come from hairy, tree climbing ancestors." This is
a specimen of the logic of ninety-nine per cent of all women
and seventy per cent of all men in deeper questions; as a
specimen of wrong logic it deserves a little analysis. Woman
is far more "body" than man. "I never shall believe it"
implies: "I am of such importance that your theory will
fall if I don't believe it," hence the "sentiment" of foolish
pride; then, "believe" it, not "study," "reason it out," 'T)e
convinced," etc., but "believe" is used here; it means: "any-
way, in any realm of thought I only go by what others
say, if it pleases me, not by my own conviction; I cannot dis-
criminate, it is too laborious; what I think must be chewed,
semi-digosted, fed to me by somebody to relieve me of the
la])or of thinking; somebody else's thinking is greater au-
thority to me than my own;" hence, "believe," shows the
sentiments of intellectual laziness or cowardice or childish-
ness. 'Must think how awful," etc. Not "think how illogi-
cal/' but "awful/' e. i, shocking, uncomfortable, a sentiment

of deference to fashion, to silly or rational customs, hence
the enunciatrix is a mere fashion machine, a slave of ances-
tor-government. "Hairy, tree climbing ancestors;'' as if -the
young woman had not, four months before her birth, been
a little lump of flesh with hair all over her body, in pro-
portion to a full grown person over four inches long; with
a tail in proportion three feet long, and arms and legs of
equal length; in her ignorance she plays actually shocked
at what she herself has been; just like a woman. To do
certain necessary acts in life is logical, pure, unavoidable,
even in her mind, but to talk of them is horrible, shock-
ing, an absurdity, indulged in for no other reason than pre-
dominance of the hypocritical thoughts of the body, a make-
belief of superiority over those of the soul (logic). This
little phrase analyzed shows, therefore, nothing but a
thoughtless, ignorant, unjustified lazy pride, combined with
intellectual babyhood and a mechanical toy wound up by
fashion, customs and lies; not a single worthy progressive
idea in it. We all read and hear thousands of phrases of
the identical type, signs of infantile intellects in adult bodies.
Much of patriotism, party fealty, family pride, religion, mor-
als, self-esteem, etc., consists of a similar jumble of body
thoughts (sentiments) only vaguely and little guided by soul
thoughts (logic). Love is mostly a thought-train of the
body, friendship a train of thoughts of the soul, or of the
union of body and soul, the man.

Aside from all inherent defects of good logic, we meet in
the manner of enouncing thoughts with great many tricks.
The person who uses technical or special terms where popu-
lar terms would answer just as well, is a pompous fraud
because he does not mean to improve us by the intrinsic,
sharp, clear quality of his logic, but because he wants to
show himself such a "superior man.'' If we were to state
that the diathermansy of hyaline sodium chloride for chromo-
calorics from plumbic silicate exceeds' the athermansy of
aluminic potassic sulphate to chromocalorics from selenile
we might present to childish intellects an awesome spectacle
of learnedness, which would almost entirely disappear were
we to say that clear rock salt allows more heat from a crys-
tal glass to pass through itself than alum al)S0Tbs heat from
plaster of Paris; by the latter statement we may have im-

proved somebody's previous knowledge, while by the first
we only strut about parading our own vocabulary with
a "how great a man am I!" Of course, some technical terms
are necessary; frequently the man or woman using clear
plain language will appear shallow or less deep; but, if prop-
erly valued, it will be foifnd much more of a feat to state
a complex idea in simple terms than to circumlocute the
same in a maze of turgid phrases. The mechanic who re-
pairs a broken crank shaft in mid-ocean with hand tools
does something many times more difficult than even the
first manufacturer with all possible machines at his disposal.
To explain photography with plain non-technical words is
more difficult than to do the same in the customary terms.
Especially odious is the person who uses needless verbiage
to express his thoughts. Very many people confound lin-
guistic noise, ease of tongue and larynx movements with
flow of ideas, deluding themselves into the complacent atti-
tude that their two or three dozens of ideas, jumbled in with
different word combinations really become thousands of
ideas; they resemble the «tage managers who, with a few
supers produce a grand procession by having them don be-
hind the scenes rapidly different hats, cloaks, tin armor,
etc., and thus in an endless caravan file across the stage.
All assemblies, senates, congresses, etc., suffer from verbiage
bores, properly called wind bags. We all have been vic-
tims to intellectual swindles where a pompous cerebral non-
entity with hardly a spoonful of ideas, with an asthmatic
mumbled voice, or a bellowing roar, has slobbered, piped,
wheezed, or thundered at us for hours without saying any-
thing worth the time. Empty verbiage is an insult to the
listener. The wind bag expects his hearers or readers to
sift this verbiage, to wash this gravel or sand bank to per-
haps find or not find some "colors" of gold. In the United
States senate are several well known horrible samples of
speakers who revamp the same ideas, e. g., silver craze, for
hours, wasting the nation's time to hear their own voices,
to read their speeches in some papers, etc. A nation, senate,
or congress has in the ensemble not one second more time
than the individual. All members have equal rights; hence,
the person who speaks for two days, although he himself
is only one eighty-sixth of the senate, uses up the time be*

longing to others, is as plainly a robber — ^a time robber —
as the burglar is a property robber. Time is money, fame,
future, life; hence in a republic no person has any more right
to an excess of time allowance in a public assembly than
he would have to the salary of the other members, their
chances in life, their health and strength.

There exist two excellent means to suppress the wind bag;
one is verbatim reports which he has no right to correct;
only, if the spouter reads the jumble of words exactly as
he spoke them will he be ashamed and stop; but this remedy
is too late, the time has been wasted, hence the system of
time allotment per session is as just as that of money allot-
ment (salary). Supposing the lower house of congress were
in session about twenty-five weeks — some preliminary esti-
mate can always be made; there are sessions only five days
in a week each of four hours' duration; of these four hours,
two hours are needed for frequently cumbersome red tape
formalities, giving two hours for speech making, or, in one
hundred twenty-five days in all, two hundred fifty hours;
as there are about three hundred twenty congressmen this
gives to each member about forty-eight minutes per session.
A book should be kept in which each congressman is ac-
curately charged with every minute used; he may use these
forty-eight minutes as he chooses, in one minute speeches,
or in one speech; no transfer of time allowed; time not used
reverts simply to the whole house. This would choke off
the windy, unjust, time-robbing bore, and, combined with
an uncorrected record result in an enormous improvement
in the business methods and business accomplished. Every-
body has odd personal habits in argument, most ol them
not offensive; but the man who cannot reason without shout-
ing, pounding the table, being a play actor, usually has only
inferior ideas to present and wants to scare us into over-
looking their weakness.

Fairness is an important element in good logic. We must
practice the principle of Con-fu-tze (usually Latinized into
Confucius): "Treat others as you would like to be treated
by them.** This means making fair allowance for the grade
of intellect with whom we discuss or to whom we address
our words. Quibbling over words or phraseology is usually
unfair in matters where the essence is more vital than the

vessel or the ideas more important than the phraseology.
To say: "I don't accept this or that statement," without
having or giving good reasons for -its refusal is not fair;
to suppose, without previous proof the other less just, truth-
ful or honest than we are, is not fair. It is fair, however,
to adjust our temper and style of argument to that of our
opponent; hence not to yell at a gentle voiced reasoner, or
to be too polite to a rabid, unfair haranguer; justice re-
quires a proper defense of our individual rights. Sarcasm
is the sickle which removes intellectual weeds, but it can-
not be used to plant good seed; merely tearing up the ground
is not agriculture or mining.

Not to fall into some of the errors pointed out, the author
takes the liberty of giving a few definitions of words in
the sense used in the book:

God — Any unit higher than the aggregate which can be
formed of certain units; thus a God in reference to
man is something with greater complexity, develop-
inent and depth than the aggregate of all men on earth
together produces. To a certain extent, as "greater,"
"development," etc., are ideals, God remains an indi-
vidual ideal. The God of the author is not Jehovah,
Brama (?), Jupiter, Allah, Wotan but Pantheos, invisi-
ble because exceeding the capacity of our eyes; inaudi-
ble because greater than our acoustic capacity, even
unintelligible, because beyond our intellect; we can only
perceive forms or phases of Pantheos near enough to
us to be accessible to our senses.
Mind-^The human brain in action.

Soul — The aggregate of all the conscious elements in our
bodies belonging to the cerebral system of nerves; its
center of dynamics is the Ego of the Soul.
Thought — The product of the work of our nerves of the

soul within the brain.
Sentiment — The result of the action of our nerves of the
body within the sympathetic system and transferred
more or less completely to the cerebral system.
Logic — The method of evolving sequences of thought from
facts or previous thoughts which prevails in the large
majority of healthy, normal, successful persons. The
very fact that "logical" people are healthy, contented,

successful, enviable, shows their reasoning to be the
best available, the most fit to survive; otherwise, peo-
ple with different modes of thinking would crowd them
out. Hence, logic implies an element of humanity at
large and a silent agreement.

Sin — A short coming (plus or minus) from an ideal- of aims.

Evolution — The adptation of organs or beings to surround-
ing conditions.

Development — The acquisition of an ability to do now more
than some time previously. While originally neutral
the word is used now in the sense of progressive de-
velopment, or a state of ability, including everything
previously acquired and something more. Thus, if a
person study chemistry but forget his knowledge of
history, he cannot claim development, merely perhaps
an evolution. Thus the adult butterfly is a develop-
ment from wingless ancestors, the wingless Teneriffa
beetle an evolution from winged African ancestors.

BLASPHEMY AND REVEEENCE.

Before entering upon the subject of the book we have
in justification of our and our readers^ thoughts to treat:
^^blasphemy.^^ Many timid intellects will be "shocked'^ by
the unavoidable bluntness of certain statements we have
to make. They think it is ^'blasphemy," a word with which
they connect an "insult to God,'^ meaning by God always
Jehovah. Let us view it analytically. Jehovah is said to
be infinitely greater than man, although as will be outlined
in the following, he may be as a real existence only little
superior to the best emotional man, even less evenly tem-
pered, hardly superior intellectually, if at all, to the high-
est intellectual man. Suppose in an anthill every one of
the ants, as a man passes by, makes faces at him, calls him
names in ant-language, spits and rails at him to their ut-
most of formic ability; a vulgar man, if he understood them,
might feel offended because he doesn^t feel himself so im-

mensely superior to the little ants; an intelligent man, if
he noticed them at all, would smile at the wretched little
creatures and say: "You would be glad to be as much as
I am,^^ but he would not think one instant of destroying
the anthill in his wrath. Thus a small God (Jehovah) might
feel vexed at our doings which to a greater God (Brama)
would be merely a source of pity and impulse to teach us to
know better, not by destroying, but by instructing us. Has
Jehovah ever instructed his people? In all his supposed ut-
terances not one word is said which the wisest man of his
time could not have uttered; Plato in 400 B. C. taught the
world better than Habakuk, a prophet of Jehovah. Buddha
is far ahead of Jesus. The various statements of the bible
in regard to things not at that time general information
are singularly vague or resemble the ravings of people not
quite normal in intellect; but even, if the man with seven
candlesticks in his mouth were an actual truth, what would
it avail us unless the key to this odd report was given; such
an "absurd" statement without key is only a bewilderment
but no instruction. Hence if we small men are not "in-
sulted" by the blasphemous" thoughts and actions of ants,
cats, dogs or even monkeys, why should a God so infinitely
greater than we — for that is claimed for Jehovah by the
Jehovahites — ^be offended by our similar acts? It is curious
that the acts of a monkey especially anger children, show-
ing the nearness of the two in the cosmic scale of develop-
ment. But, unless man be only a monkey to a child God,
he will not insult him, cannot reach him. Blasphemy is
an invention of the iron rule of a clever priestcraft.

Huxley, Tyndall, Haeckel, Spencer and other most pro-
gressive, foremost, thoroughly competent exponents of mod-
ern highest thought, often use the word "God." The adher-
ents of Jehovah and of Jesus take all such passages as con-
cessions to their creeds, so do Mahommetans, Hindoos. The
truth is that "God" is the general word for supreme being
or rather more correctly any being, imagined more power-
ful than ourselves. The Jehovahites seem to think that
unless "God" means Jehovah, it means nothing. Far from
that; just as we have the general word of "quadruped" to
include all animals of that number of legs, thus the gen-
eral word "God" is the term under which Jehovah, Allah,

Jupiter, Brahma, even • Pantheos, in its phases, etc., have
to be classed; and while each of these sub-ideas of God has
some traits of the general "God," neither of them can claim
to be "the God," just as little as the horse could claim to
be the quadruped. This is merely a generally admitted dis-
tinction of language terms, aside from all philosophy. As
a rule scientists speaking of "God" mean Pantheos, imper-
sonal, all pervading, being and comprising everything. Even
the nearest form of Pantheos which our intellect can dimly
grasp is only a form of "God;" our intellect can conceive
the possibility of the existence of Pantheos forms beyond
that of the earth, the solar system, the universe, although
this is the very limit we can even think; but we can hardly
call them "Gods" because we know absolutely nothing about
them, not enough even to classify them. If Professor Haeckel,
an especially keen observer and logician, meant Jehovah in
speaking of "God," he would carry his conviction into his
life, would be a member of a church, observing its rites and
paying his tithes; but he does not; he sees his God only
through the medium of his microscopes and apparatus; Hux-
ley, Tyndall, Spencer and others also frequently speak of
"God," and are interpreted by the crafty priests of Jehovah
to mean their God; those are all fearless men who would go
to church and hire pews if their "God" was the God who
dwelleth every Sunday from 10:30 a. m. to noon in a musty
church, enjoying the odor of burnt flesh or burning rosin
(incense).

Hence, whenever we find in a truly scientific work the
word "God" used, on prima facie evidence we may say the
writer meant Pantheos, unless he proved himself a Jeho-
vahite, Buddhist or Mohammetan; but in popular writings
God usually means with us Jehovah. Blasphemy has even
by law been defined as an offense against "God," always mean-
ing Jehovah; as if Jehovah, if he was a true God, could not
take care of himself! If anything is the lowest, vilest blas-
phemy it is a statute in force in some American micro-states
which appraises the injured dignity of Jehovah at $10; for,
that is the fine for it, for instance in New Jersey, Pennsyl-
* vania and Bussia. Any man can sue another man for libel
and recover thousands of dollars, but the dignity of Jehovah
is worth by that statute only $10. If Jehovah is the all

powerful God and feels insulted not billions of people can
stem his wrath; but he cannot be insulted by such exceedingly
inferior beings as we are. Jehovah can only be insulted by
his equals; even you or 1 are not insulted by people far be-
low or above us; hence the Jersey statute places Jehovah
on about the level of a negro whose ears we boxed — fine $10.

There is not a trace of "irreverence" in this statement;
quite the contrary. By supposing Jehovah as not insultable
by us we grade him much higher than if we bring him to
a level where we can insult him. Do you suppose you or I
can really insult the Emperor of Russia? Not by words —
and "blasphemy'^ can be only a word or thought insult,
since we cannot see or feel Jehovah according to the creed
of Jehovahites. Supposing you Or I were to write the most
outrageous things about the emperor, if he were to read
them he would smile: a lunatic! But if we were in Rus-
sia he might, for the sake of an example or for "general
effect," punish or put us in, an insane asylum. Is not Je-
hovah far above the Emperor of Russia? Cannot he by
his own means avenge "insults?"

Another statue, e. g. in that state of New Jersey, refers
to swearing and profane language. It is the same idea of
an insulted God-Jehovah — worth $2 fine each cussword.
The English term "swearing" is really a misnomer. To
swear means to make oath, the law confounds swearing and
wishing evil or cursing.

Another sophistry of the priests of Jehovah is "respect
and reverence" for their creed. All creeds are to those
who do not believe in those particular creeds alike absurd;
hence, why should they respect them? Do the Jehovahites
respect Mahommetanism? This "respect" is merely a trick
by which the priests hope to keep their . followers together.
Of course, if they succeed in imnressing a person of ^n*
other creed to "respect^ Jehovahism, they have sealed that
person's mouth against expounding his creed to Jehovah fol-
lowers. No "respect" unless it be mutual! Even then, it
will only consist in mutually refraining from unnecessary
illogical flippancy. But "respect" of the right kind never
prevented Richard Coeur de Lion and Saladin from engag-
ing in deadly combat.

Another very common trick of logic of Jehovahites is this:

"See the millions who worship Christ and Jehovah, the
thousands of churches representing so many millions of dol-
lars; see how old his church, how it has spread to all lands,
how millions have given their lives for it?" Put into this
argument in succession Jupiter, Allah, Brama or Buddha
instead of Jehovah ajid it is just as true. Numbers of peo-
ple represent only tons of flesh, bone, brains. If among
a thousand people not one knows Algebra, will they, by add-
ing their intellects together know Algebra as a village?
Certainly not! One intellect knowing Algebra is for its
purpose worth one billion not knowing; ten billion intel-
lects, all believing the same thing, do not make it one iota
more or less true. In matters of intellect addition is en-
tirely worthless, except as to conventionalized ideas, like
language, meaning of words, writing, notation of music, etc.
Each individual intellect is equal in power within its own
brains to more than all others added. But, let us admit,
for an instant, the sophistry of Jehovahites. If one million
people, believing a certain creed, make that a true creed,
two million people believing differently would make theirs
true and the others wrong; or it would take only a sufficient
number of millions of believers, millions of dollars invested
in bricks for churches, etc., to make 7x8=58. Let us
about estimate how many died in the different beliefs since
their foundation:*

Bramaism and Buddhism— 2500 B. C. to 1897 A. D. 4,397 years @ 5 mUl.
about 21,985 millions.

Greclanlsm— 1200 B. C. to 400 A. D. 1,600 years @ 2 mill, about 3,200 mil-
lions.

Teutonism— ? B. C. to 800 A. D. 1,500 years © 1 mill, about 1,500 mil-
lions.

Mahommetanism— 622 A. D. to 1897 A. D. 1,275 years @ 2% mill, about
3,090 millions.

Jehovahism pure (Judaism)— 2000 B. C. to 1897 A. D. 3,897 years @ 200,000
about 779 millions.

Christianity— 30 A. D. to 1897, 1.867 years ® 3 mill, about 5,601 millions.

Fetishism (incl. perverted Buddhism)— ? A. D. to 1897 A. D. 10,000
years ® 6 mill, about 60,000 millions.

Hence, if number of believers proved anything, Chris-
tianity would be at least four times more wrong than Br^ma-

•Those figures of annual death are, of course, only reasonable esti-
mates. Buddhism is certainly estimated too low, because to-day at
least 20 millions die annually in that faith and that of its sects, while
Christianity Is estimated high, since only during this century more
people live in Europe than in India alone, not counting China. An
average of 100 mill. Christians living since 30 A. D. is exceedingly
liberal, from 1200 to 1800 Europe had no such population.

ism (Buddhism) and not so much superior to Mohammetan-
isiii. More people than live to-day have died in any of those
ancient personal God religions except Judaism. Hiamaisni
can hardly be classed as a personal God religion, although
many of its many sects (Buddhism) make Brama a rather
personal form. If it was not for the fact that our fellow
citizens are Christians and Jehovahites, we would not give
that creed much attention. Bramaism, in its refined forms,
is to-day a far more exalted religion, its Bi^ama is as far
above Jehovah as Jehovah is above Jupiter, but simply the
fact that we do not live among Bramans or Buddhists ab-
solves us from the necessity of having to compare their
exceedingly complex, even deep, theories and doctrines; but
we must now and then clear away Christian or Jehovahite
bias to give to our ideas a hearing and to defend our own
liberty against the attacks and violent measures (laws, fines,
insults) etc., of the Jehovahites. Hence it is not because
we consider Jehovahism the most important antagonist to
true Pantheism, merely the nearest, that now and then we
have to give the appearance of attacking it. We do not
really attack it, w^e intend merely to justify our course in
not accepting it.

So often do w'e also hear exponents of the faith in Je-
hovah and Yeshua (Jesus) boast of the great present spread
of their creed and its offspring, Christianity.

Is it not a fact that the propaganda of Christianity into
Asia has been as pronounced a failure as it could well be?
Could it be any worse failure? Imagine a society for the
spread of the metric system of weights and measures among
the Chinese, Japanese and Hindoos to have spent one thou-
sand million dollars in one hundred years, to have sent
forty thousand missionaries to those lands and to have to-
day among all those seven or eight hundred million people
only one and one-half millions of converts, of which three
hundred thousand w^ere gained by unallied Catholic mis-
sionaries two hundred years ago. Could any propaganda
show poorer results? Without any paid missionaries and
emissaries the metric system has gained in a hundred years
over five hundred million users in common life — only Eng-
land and the United States do not use it— while all scientific
men, the world over, use it almost exclusively; yet it is far

•

from perfect, its nomenclature is barbarous, its units un-
wieldy, but its logic conquered the world. If Christianity
showed similar logic, historical or racial drawbacks could
never prove powerful enough to prevent its spread. Yes,
Christianity has gained some five hundred thousand converts
in the last hundred years in Oceanica, some two million ne-
groes in Africa; but Mahommetanism has gained there in
the meanwhile forty millions. Christianity has gained in
a hundred years about two hundred thousand in Japan; but
in forty years the Pantheism of Darwin, Haeckel, Spencer,
has gained perhaps two millions of the best intellects in
that progressive land.

Has Christianity kept its hold in the lands it once pos-
sessed? Hardly. While the number of nominal believers
to-day is about five hundred millions and was only two hun-
dred millions a hundred years ago, the increase is due to
the reproductive organs of the race, not to the spread of
the gospel. Has the number of church goers — only those
are the real, the others are merely custom-Christians — ^in-
creased? Not at all. In 1850 the churches of Berlin had
a capacity for ten per cent of the population; to-day for
only six per cent; those of London in 1830 for twenty-five
per cent of the population, to-day for twelve per cent; those
of New York in 1840 for fifty-five per cent of the popula-
tion, to-day for thirty per cent. Churches of sufficient ca-
pacity would have been built if people wanted to attend.
There was never any scarcity of funds for Jehovah and his
creed since 400 A. D., but even to-day his churches, ex-
cept those of the threatening Catholic sects, are only mod-
erately filled.

THE BIBLE.

Why do we not consider the Bible as our highest author-
ity and conclusive final court of appeal in matters of in-
tellect or morals? This subject is treated here, not because
of the author^s personal overwhelming interest in the book;
there are thousands of equally interesting, only not so well
known old books in the Hindoo, Chinese, Egyptian, even
Assyrian and Greek history extant, but because many of
our fellow citizens have an almost superstitious reverence
for it. What is the attitude of the modern real scientist to
the Bible? ' "It is a very old book/^ That is all he can
safely assert. Otherwise we know little about it. It is rea-
sonable to suppose the following outlines as about correct.

Between 1800 to 1200 B. C. a tribe of Phoenicians, very
small, emigrated from Egypt under a leader "Moses,'' a
powerful man physically and intellectually; he impressed his
creed and theories upon his tribe; the hearsay stories about
him and his theories form the contents of the "Books of
Moses.'' Much about it may be true, very much is exag-
geration around a kernel of truth, some may be the acts
of his successors, etc. How did they preserve the records?
The census of Israel in the desert is so utterly improbable
not only in itself, but also because not borne out by subse-
quent increase, that instead of the "people of Israel" wan-
dering from Egypt it should be "the band" or tribe; Pales-
tine could never support ten millions of people. If the Jews
increased in Egypt in four hundred years from say a hun-
dred to six hundred thousand adult males, they would have
doubled every thirty-one years, so utterly at variance with
the highest figures now observed of increase by births over
deaths, that in one hundred fifty years more they would
have filled Palestine beyond its capacity, and in another one
hundred fifty years more, or at the time of Saul, would
have been over two hundred eighty millions. There is no

such fecundity in the Jewish or any other tribe. It may
have been a tribe of at the most a few hundreds, but noth-
ing hke such a nation as the bible narrative represents. The
very clearly absurd exaggeration in figures which the an-
cient exaggerator does not suspect of being easily trace-
able, makes the supposition of gross exaggeration in oth^r
reports far more plausible than the theory that e. g. those
two million (?) lived for years in the desolate Sinaitic des-
ert, as related. We must never forget that all the records
were iii the keeping of priests who had all the interest pos-
sible to exaggerate the grandeur of Moses, because they
themselves became by that so much more important; these
records may have consisted of papyri, tablets or stone in-
scriptions — ^absolutely not a trace remains, Alexander the
Great in 330 B. C. conquered Jerusalem, that is to say it
simply surrendered without a fight as Pausanias relates;
Alexander went into the temple and was shown the "Holy
Books,'^ which, as it is plainly stated by Pausanias, any one
can read it, "as their priests explained predicted his com-
ing." Is that the famous passage of: "A King is going to
rise" which has been applied to every conqueror of Ju-
dah, to the philosopher of Nazareth and the son of Napo-
leon the I; and here evidently to Alexander? Those elastic
prophecies were handy. We have far less reason to doubt
Pausanias who wrote a very short time after Alexander's
death, than the Jewish priests whose bread and butter was
bound up in those books.

About the historical existence of David, Solomon and those
following him there is little doubt; a nation of one million
Jews in those times of slow travel would have been quite a
great nation in its territory; but — they never conquered the
Moabites! Has anybody who ever saw that dreary desert
land of the Moabites ever supposed that more than fifty thou-
sand could live on the few thousand square miles of their
most arid land, nine-tenths of which is desert? It is one
of the most sterile regions on the globe and could only sup-
port by greatest labor some fifty thousand people; the "^^city
of Gaza" shows by its ruins that it was a very small place.
Hence, viewed by the possibilities of land and people of
to-day it seems questionable whether the Jews in Palestine
ever counted more than one million in those times. Jeru-

salem is not built to contain at the most more than one
hundred fifty thousand people during war; we can see the
ancient walls to-day; hence a reasonable view of the Hebrews
is that of a very small tribe greatly given to exaggeration;
their very system of counting in their ancient language is
not precise and may be interpreted differently. We must
also not forget that, at their height, the Jews never ruled
over a territory as large or as populous even as the state
of Indiana. Yet, in reading their book of Kings, the armies
of Xerxes, Napoleon, Grant or Moltke become rather small.
It is still to-day a trait of the Jew to be given to a flowery
exaggerating language, and some of the most unabashed
persistent and consistent liars we meet are some Jewish com-
mercial travellers. As a race it does not give the impres-
sion of being the most painstakingly truthful. The books
of Prophets are of the most obscure origin; we have noth-
ing but copies of copies of copies, etc., not older than by
at least six hundred years (!) younger than those "proph-
ets.^^ How can we judge of the truth of their prophecy
when we know nothing at all reliable about the date of the
prophecy and have to accept the same kind of authority
for its having been fulfilled as we have to accept for its
having been made at the time claimed! That is too much
of an illogical demand. Besides, those prophesies, as we
read them to-day, are all so vague, applicable almost any
year to some happening, that they certainly do not rank
above the sayings of the oracle at Pythias. If the prophet
really foresaw specific occurrences, he could and would have
given names, places and dates. But those vague generalities
to which any interpretation may be given just suited the
purposes of the priesthood; they could interpret them at
any time to suit them. (See Pausanias about Alexander.)

The book of the ^faccabaes — ^not included in the King
James bible, why? — ^bears on its face the impression of ona
of the most historical. It is a border warfare between robber
bands and guerillas.

About 100 B. C. a Greek translation was made .of the
entire old testament, a copy of a copy of a copy, of this
translation exists, perhaps dating about 200 A. D. Some
Syriae fragments of the old testament exist which may date
a little before Christ.

Now what an immense chance of corruption, exaggera-
tion, interpolation, distortion of a supposed original narra-.
tive of which we have only real copies over one thousand
years later than the originals were said to have been writ-
ten! Yet scientists do not deny the possible existence of
some such originals; only good proof of their existence lies
in the strong tradition in the living Jews. If all the old
books of the old testament were destroyed to-day, for sev-
eral generations the Jews would teach their children what
they heard and read, but it could not fail to become less and
less accurate, exaggerated here and curtailed there and if,
after four hundred years, a committee should again collect
the fragments, we would find the result like the well known
children's game, "pass-it-on/^ The Abyssinians of to-day
have such a pass-it-on bible. Could that tradition, by any
logic, be considered stronger than the evidence of our pres-
ent senses and logic? By no means. Even Jehovah-priests
do not maintain that written precise records existed before
Moses. How then could Moses have obtained his record of
the creation? Only by tradition. From Moses to creation
were, according to biblical authorities, about two thousand
five hundred years or eighty generations! Has any one
realized what that means? The author will illustrate by a
personal experience. When he was a very small boy two
and one-half years old his father took him up a high gar-
ret to a very, very old man. The author recalls that the
old man made a face at him, as he thought, and said some-
thing to him out of which he recollected: "Somebody
stormed a town." When the author was a little older his
father explained the riddle. That very old person was the
author's great-great-grandfather on mother's side; he had
been enjoined by his great-grandfather to tell his youngest
descendant that that other great-grandfather had witnessed
personally the storming of the town by the duke of Marl-
borough (1707). Now, that was only tradition through
eight generations, but already the name of the town had
disappeared; the name Marlborough had become "Malbroo"
and everything else had become entirely obliterated. Even,
if bards and travelling minstrels keep alive such an event,
it becomes like Homer's Iliad, a song with a high percentage
of fiction and only a skeleton of truth. But to suppose that

a tradition should have preserved a true account for eighty
generations is so utterly unlogical as to be inadmissible.
Just suppose that the English possessed to-day some tra-
ditions about their doings in the year 700 B. C! For that
reason even Jehovahites have recourse to a brilliant (?) hy-
pothesis: "inspiration/^ Jehovah inspired the account, that
is to say, while declining responsibility for details — see mod-
em "higher criticism" — ^he looked to it that in general it
was correct. What an absurdity! Either their supposed
Jehovah is slovenly, skips details, or else he is small, has
to use all his strength in preserving the general truth and
cannot pay attention to details. Prof. Eiddle, one ol the
translators of the New Version, once said in the au-
thor^s hearing: "The translators found about 100,000 small
mistakes in the King James version/^ "Small mistakes'^
when one of the pillar passages of the trinity faith: "For
three are in Heaven to give witness, the Father, the Son
and the Holy Ghost," had to be omitted from the Revised
Version because of palpable forgery. Can we suppose log-
ically God or even Jehovah to "inspire" a book and allow
such an immense number of "small errors" to creep in? In
1896 a law in New York state was declared unconstitutional
because a comma was misplaced. If there is such weight in
a small comma in common vulgar human affairs, should we
not logically suppose Jehovah, especially if he was the high-
est God, to be infinitely more careful about "His book?"
In the last century a Hollander, Vega, constructed a table of
logarithms. To the non-mathematical readers logarithms
mav be explained as figures which simplify very much the
multiplication, division and radication of long figures; to
the mathematician they are the powers or exponents of 10
which give a certain number; e. g., the logarithm of 3 on
basis 10 is 0.4771213, which means, if 10 be multiplied
4,771,213 times by itself and the 10,000,000th root be ex-
tracted, that the result will be 3. All these logarithms, except
those of 0, 1, 10, 100, etc., are decimals without exact end.
Vega calculated them to the 7th and later he and others to
the 10th, even to the 40th and 200th decimal (of some fig-
ures). He published them in a book corftaining approximate-
ly 500,000 figures, all the result of complex figuring; he had
the help of an intelligent company of soldiers which the

prince put at his disposal. When finished he offered a price
of about fifty dollars for every mistake discovered. And not
more than less than a himdred were found! Now- this was a
purely human work, only inspired by the many phases of
Pantheos of science which do not anticipate, merely develop
as man develops, yet the tables of logarithms of to-day con-
tain still fewer mistakes. A thousand errors in a table of
logarithms are a mere trifle compared with one error in a
book for which it is claimed that it contains only Jehovah's
inspired truth and is purposely gotten up to save souls.
Are souls cheaper than errors of arithmetic and not worth
the same care? If Jehovah inspired the first account is it
not logical to suppose that he kept his eye on it, so to speak,
in the future and, by a twitch in the muscles or pen, pre-
vented the copist from blundering, the selfish priest from
inserting, the zelot from altering phrases? Man, so much
smaller and engaged in so much less important work, would
do it, if he could. Do Jehovahites believe Jehovah to be
weaker than man, or even as weak? Inspiration by a God
is incompatible even with the smallest error; if such an
error exists it is evident that "inspiration" is only a human
figment. The Bible, "inspired by Jehovah," becomes a wild
worthless tangle of senseless, coarse absurdities; uninspired
an absolutely true record of human observation, tradition,
fiction, exaggeration mixed with a few good ideas from in-
telligent contributors.

.About the middle of the reign of the Emperor
Augustus a Jewish Buddah appeared, called by the
Greeks lesus (pronounce either EE-aysos or EEeesos), by
the Jews Yeshua, the name corrupted in English into
"Jesus;" his existence is entirely probable, because without
such a center, those Jewish fishermen and tradesmen never
would have invented such stories, sayings and teachings.
He was a precocious child, the event in the temple shows
it, but this it nothing unusual. The author remembers
in his boyhood days a teacher of religion greatly amusing
himself and his fellows by visiting the class for the purpose
of discussing with a bright boy of ready wit in that class
certain scripture passages^ the boy was not older than nine
years. Where was Christ (mostly mispronounced instead of
Chreest) from the age of twelve to that of thirty? Did he

not meet some Hindoo teachers? His gospel of voluntary
poverty, of giving to the poor, of not heeding the morrow, is
distinctly Hindoo, anticipated three hundred years before
him by Buddah, even his "forgive your enemies^' is not orig-
inal. We know the influence of faith in curing certain
nerve diseases; many a negro in the South has been cured
of such nerve diseases by a Voodoo in which he had faith,
hence of his cures many may have actually occurred. The
stories of his temptation by Satan evidently show that trait
so common to all genius, — ^a touch of insanity. Even
Luther "saw Satan,^^ but, being more violent, threw his ink
well at him, and while the supply of ink holds out, the
stain will be shown to visitors. Christ's entire life is logical
if we do not suppose him a specific God, by merely allowing
for the same amount of distortion in the narrative about
him that would happen to-day, if only ignorant people saw
his acts and only hearsay reports were transmitted, and the
records only made up after the lapse of years. Which in-
telligent man could give even one page correctly of what
his mother said to him perhaps only ten years ago? He might
or might not remember the trend, but the words would be
essentially his. The author could not fill one page of ver-
batim sayings of his father, a very bright, intelligent man,
but he could write several of them filled with words which,
according to his knowledge, he "might'^ have used. If we
are of an "impressible" credulous nature we might convince
ourselves that those were his actual words; even of the great-
est man we met, a man t\'ho impressed us most forcibly, we
could not quote reliably one page. Hence, again, the Je-
hovah priests, to protect themselves against such a clear
common sense view, invent their "inspiration'' in regard to
the pages after pages of "sayings of Christ."

Every single natural suggestion about the resurrection of
Christ from his "tomb," is a million times more credible and
logical than that of a revival from real death. The sugges-
tion that his "death" was merely a deep swoon is the most
logical. Is it any more wonderful than two hap])enings in
18J)7? A negro was hanged in the South of tlie Ignited
States, declared "dead" by the ])hysician, ])ut after about
half an hour revived and had to be lianged again (see papers
of July, 1897). Many soldiers on the battlefields were

thought to be dead for hours, even a day, but revived and
recovered. Supposing the account of the crucifixion reason-
ably correct, the opening of the chest by a lance is not at
all fatal, a man in Illinois in July, 1897, recovered in two
weeks from a bullet through his breastbone into the peri-
cardium, grazing the heart; the bullet was not found (see
Nelson case of July, 1897, Chicago papers). A swoon of
only five hours would be enough to be mistaken for death;
even to-day physicians mistake occasionally deep sw^oons,
catalepsy, etc., for death, and by that time Christ was in the
tomb, the quiet cool air revived him and he rallied enough
in a couple of days to roll away the stone and go out; no
man, especially not a sick one, starves in three days. One
must not forget that a Jewish vault is built raised, hence a
stone may be difficult to roll up the little embankment, but
easy to roll down; a great many other possibilities of common
daily parallels may be suggested, every one millions of times
more logical and plausible than that given by the priests of
Jehovah. After his resurrection he showed himself to sev-
eral, but evidently was not as vigorous, was feeble and suf-
fering and died in six weeks from insufficiently attended
wounds or blood poisoning. "And God took him away."
The story of his ascension, really the most marvellous in all
books of the Bible, is never very much touched on by Jeho-
vahites; they seem to lay stress on the resurrection; that seems
to them better proved. But the ascension does not allow of
a human explanation at all. Although it is a parallel of
Buddha, it does not seem logical to suppose the idea bor-
rowed from Buddha because the ascension must have been
invented by those surviving him and they did not agree. One
gospel says he ascended from Mount Olivet, the other
from Bethany Carmel, one (Mark) says before his disciples
and a few others, the others before many thousands, one does
not mention it at all (Matthew), one says only God took him
away. About no event are the accounts more conflicting
than in this greatest miracle. Is this inspiration? Whither
did he ascend? Was that cloud the end of his trip, and is
the Heaven therefore about four to five miles above our
earth? Then the balloons which went eleven miles must
have gone through it. Why did Jesus ascend to find 'Tiis
Father?" Was not his Father everywhere? Is not Jehovah

everywhere? Does Jehovah only live a few miles above us
behind some cloud? How about those Hindoo Fakirs who
produced the same illusion before much better witnesses than
Jewish fishermen? Does the Heaven and Jehovah only
travel behind clouds so as to be invisible and inaudible on
bright days? Man on mountains and in balloons has looked
behind those clouds. While he found there Pantheos, he
found no Jehovah or divine thrones. Christ ascended slow-
ly. Was that for stage effect? What an unworthy suppo-
sition for a great God. If Christ knew the method of de-
priving man of weight why did he not give a hint to his
disciples? If he had done something of that kind no sci-
entist but who would acknowledge him such a superior
, phase of Pantheos as well to be entitled to the name of
*^God." Christ as "Gad'^ performed only the part of an
actor in a drama; he only played "man.'* Christ as a man
ranks with Buddha and Socrates; he is one of the bright
beacons of man's development. The new testament shows in
every phrase its thorough human character of error, exag-
geration, incompleteness, prejudice, even insanity (see Reve-
lations). To suppose this collection of old scattered hearsay
reports and copies of copies of copies of hearsay writings
to be inspired degrades "Jehovah" below the maker of the
table of logarithms. The fact that Christ proclaimed him-
self the "Son of God," the Messiah to come, is no proof that
he was what he claimed. If we were to admit such claims
we would have to imprison ourselves into lunatic asylums
and allow those emperors, popes, gods, etc., now in them to
go forth free, w^ith the keys to our cells in their possession.
Yet, every Sunday in thousands of pulpits we hear the false
logic implied in the question: "What did Christ say about
himself? He said * * * "

Our oldest Gospel manuscript is about two hundred and
fifty years after the death of Christ, the oldest manuscript
mentioning sayings of Christ about one hundred and fifty
years after his death. What a chance for errors in an age
and among a race any way not noted for accuracy!

The Bible treated as a human book from Adam to Revela-
tions is a most interesting, even elevating and inspiring work;
treated as an inspiration from Jehovah, it is a degrada-
tion of "Jehovah" and an endless tangle of absurdity, in-

sanity, even fraud and untruth, but for the modern thinker
or scientist it contains too few truly rehable data to be of
much use; hence he simply leaves it to one side as he does
the Zendavesta, the Purana, the writings of Con-fu-tse, of
Plato, Marcus Aurelius and even Shakespeare, while he is
engaged in scientific work, but he enriches his mind in his
leisure hours from the wealth of historical humanity stored
in them. Of course, the simple-minded persons who con-
sider particularly the King James version inspired, almost
so much so that they suppose Christ must have spoken that
old lisping English, may be happy in their faith just as
many are happy behind the bars of a maison de sant6, but
man cannot learn in this world, cannot progress and cannot
expect success in future existences if he shuts his ears and
eyes to truths simply because they interfere with his com-
placent attitude; indolence of thought is the main strength
of every established religion, and the bodily sleep often in-
dulged in church is only the outward symbol of a sleeping
soul. If we are not awake now we may not be granted rest
in future existences.

It is of minor interest that all the English Bible names
so frequently used by believers are all horrible mispronun-
ciations and misspellings which would make the apostles
laugh if they could hear them. It is just as if we read in a
Chinese paper an account of how "President Mah Keen lay
appointed General Poh-tale (Porter) tQ be ambassador to
SheF mah-nee (Germany)" or some such specimen; the
names Jesus, Mary, Luke, Paul, John, etc., are even worse
corruptions than the Chinese Mah Keen lay is for McKin-
ley; they are positively disrespectful nicknames and familiar
"tfim," "Tom" forms of address; every single name, except-
ing perhaps Moses, Solomon and a few of the Kings, is mis-
pronounced and misspelt in the English version. The
English have created for themselves a specifically peopled
Bible. The French, Italians and Spaniards have all similar
but different distortions of the names; even the Eussians
have corrupted them; of all the nations the German (Yay-
soos) adheres far more closely to the Hebrew or Greek names
than any other language; only a few names are slightly mis-
spelt like Johannes instead of loannes (John), Christus in-
stead of Christos/ Peter instead of Petros; there is no ques-

tion at all tl\at.the English Bible names are all most horrible
Chinese-like corruptions of the old Jewish ones.

It might seem incredible, but from careful enquiry we are
forced to conclude that not one man in one hundred while
in full manhood has read the entire Bible; in spite of the
fact that a majority are pliable tools of the priesthood, ready
to enforce the business-day of the clergy by the strong arm
of the law. Some business men read, while at Sunday-
school, a few well washed, cleansed, expurgated passages;
others read chapters here and there, but few only read the
entire Bible. Either people are swinishly material, not car-
ing one iota of what becomes of them after death, or they
have a childishly blind faith in their priests, trusting that
they will care for their souls or are simply stupidly caffir-
like indifferent, if as "Christians" they fail to read the Bible
iiot once but dozens of times from Genesis to Revelations.
We would recommend most heartily extensive Bible read-
ing. No better argument against its inspiration and Jehovah
exists than careful reading of a good translation like the re-
vised version. If any one can read it, keeping constantly
in mind that according to the claims of the priesthood, that
which they are reading is superhuman wisdom, divine re-
finement, exalted morality, unspeakable beauty, because it is
Jehovah's ownest book, — and not feel more amused than in
reading the best comic paper, we miss our estimate of a good
sound human intellect. Read it often, but never forget at
every phrase that this very phrase is claimed to be the high-
est voice of Jehovah fixed within the printed lines.

The priest who made the headings of the chapters must
have been the most phenomenal liar of his times. Hardly a
single one of these headings is correct; they intend to give a
summary. Read the song of Solomon, a fairly ardent Jew-
ish love song describing minutely the feminine charms of
Shulamith, her abdomen and bust. That pious forger
heads, e. g., chapter v thus: "Christ awaketh the Church with
his calling; the church having a taste of Christ's love is sick
of love (!) Description of Christ by his graces." After this
heading one would expect a religious hymn. By no means.
There follow the vagaries of a lovesick oriental girl whose
lover is teasing her. And thus chapter after chapter in
Psalms, Proverbs, Prophets, etc., is headed with the most

positive yet withal stupid and shallow lies about Church,
Christ, etc., of which not one word is said in the text itself.

Kead the Bible often and freely; you will stumble across
specimens of the silliest wrong translation imaginable. Thus
"Holy Ghost" in capitals will impose you; simple capitals
are here made to lie; no capitals exist in the Latin or Greek
originals, but the English using the capital tries, by a silent
lie of print, to force the idea into your eyes that "Holy
Ghost" is something grand, exalted, while it is nothing but
a stupid wrong translation for "holy mind" or "holy zeal."
As "Holy Ghost" it appears like something mysterious from
without, while the original text plainly shows that it is some
kind of mental attitude just like an "obstinate mind," a
"frivolous mind," an "unholy zeal." The entire "Holy
Ghost" lives on this wrong translation; it is its very exist-
ence, just as "Son of God" is a term used for every prophet,
Isaiah, e. g., "the King prosecuted the sons of God," etc.
"Son of a virgin" is a similar linguistic confusion; very often
the first son of a woman is called the "virgin's son;" as the
Latin and Greek languages have no "a" or "the" (Latin) the
translation "son of a virgin" is an English or modem lan-
guage forgery.

Read the Bible; its exalted refinement from "the dog and

his vomit" up to "every one that against the wall,"

which latter expression the lady Michal uses, may and may
not shock you. It is Jehovah's highest book and Jehovah is
beauty itself.

Read the Bible; no "art exhibit" in a drinking saloon
equals the manifoldness of sexual misdemeanors and details
described in the Bible for effective salaciousness. Jehovah
legalizes concubines and all other sexual misdeeds, if only
you are circumcised. Do the clergymen of Jehovah dare to
ask their followers to read Darwin's or Spencer's work, or
even this little book?

Read the proverbs. For inane platitudinous shallow-
ness they are unsurpassed. No modem paper would print
them as pithy sayings. Evidently Solomon used a box into
which he put blocks imprinted with Lord, righteous, wicked,
whoredom, fool, foolishness, folly, praise, fear, etc., shook
up the box, pulled out blocks and, lo and behold, another
proverb! Among these six hundred so-called proverbs there
s

are not ten which are worth quoting; read them if you don^t
believe it. Never lose sight of the Jehovahite claim: "1 am
reading superhuman wisdom/^ while you read the Bible, and
this reading will be the most powerful apostle of pantheism
or Buddhism or anything but Jehovahism.

The priests evidently rely on the average ignorance about
the Bible, when they teach their so-called ^^doctrines,** fre-
quently mere excuses for the undubitable weakness, coarse-
ness and imperfection of Jehovah as plainly depicted in his
own "inspired" Bible. In trying to make illogical passages
appear logical they heap absurdity upon absurdity.

It is strange how positive lies, falsehoods, are taught the
young by the priests of Jehovah. Thus, when the author
was young, the Sunday-school teacher — a priest himself,
learned and competent— emphasized especially a prophesy
in Isaiah vii, 14: "Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear
a son and shall call him Immanuel," as referring to Christ,
when right in the next chapter viii, 3 and viii, 8 it is ex-
plained that this refers to the child of Isaiah himself and a
"prophetess," later called Maher-shahal-hash-baz, and ^T)y
God named Immanuel" (Savior). In dozens of passages is
the first child of a wdfe called the virgin's child; hence no
immaculate conception even hinted at. There is nowhere in
old and new testament a single passage teaching the trinity;
for the only one: Three are in heaven to give witness, the
Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, has been found a
gross forgery of the fifteenth century and is even omitted in
the revised version made by pious biased ("reverent") priests.

Hell does not exist in the old testament. Where
"gehenna" is mentioned it means merely a place after death
exactly like the Greek Hades. In hundreds of passages of
the old testament is taught plain clear cut annihilation after
death for good and bad alike. See, e. g., Ecclesiast. iv, 19:
For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth the
beasts; even one thing befalleth them, as one dieth so dieth
the other, yea, they have all one breath; so that man hath
no pre-eminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto
one place, all are of the dust and* all turn to dust again.
Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward and the
spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth? There
is nothing better for man than that he should eat and drink

and that he should make his soul enjoy good in his labor.
* * * This also I saw that it was from the hand of God."
Even the immortality of the soul is denied here!

No Voltaire, Payne, Huxley, llaeckel, Ingersoll ever
preached as gross materialism as in these lines of the Eccle-
siast, who is supposed to be the all-wise Solomon. How
can the priests dare to preach life after death in face of such
and many other passages of similar nature?

Even the new testament contains no idea of life after
death; their "Kingdom to come" is a material one. Every
single passage in the new testament about the future refers
to an expected return of Jesus between 40 and 100 A. D.
to establish a material Kingdom for his followers, while his
adversaries would be put into an earthly prison with bad
treatment. As some of these followers of Christ died before
he came and while the apostles were yet alive, they invented
as a hopeful theory that at the sound of the trumpet they
would rise and take their places at the right of the throne.
Even Paul in his letters shows that he thinks Christ's com-
ing due about 60 to 100 A. D. All his passages are thor-
oughly intelligible if read under that light. When this
coming failed, then began the priests slowly between 150
and 350 A. D. to ascribe to all these passages and hopes an
allegorical distant meaning, and thus gradually the "church"
overcame that feeling of disappointment.

Paul also, in Romans i, 3, explains very clearly that Jesus
Christ was a man "made of the seed of David according to
the flesh," hence no immaculate conception and "declared to
be the Son of God;" hence he was not de natura, only by title
declared to be so. Only John, the lunatic of Patmos, de-
clares Jesus to be God not quite equal to the father; all other
evangelists and apostles declare him a man, raised by Jeho-
vah to a mysterious dignity and given power to rule the
Kingdom to come, due about 60 A. D., which never came.

The Trinity idea is certainly entirely absent in the old
aiid new testament. Let any one read it unbiased as he
would any other book, and he will find that the writers
ascribe to Jehovah a soul, just because their Jehovah is only
a man imagined a little larger than we, — that he has many
sons (Gen. vii, 2, etc.) but no trinity!

IV.
WHY NOT JEHOVAH?

What are the chief objections to accepting Jehovah as
the God? Jehovah is the God of the Bible; he is the god
of the Jews and to a certain extent of the Christians. To
a Christian "God" always means Jehovah or Christ and
nothing else; to an uncommitted philosopher "god" is an
objectionable term because loaded down with historic, racial,
emotional, terrifying, promising, rewarding and punishing
qualities which make the word extremely vague. "God"
means Brama to seven hundred or eight hundred millions
fully as intelligent as the five hundred millions of good be-
lievers in Jehovah (Polish, Irish, Italians, Spaniards, Portu-
guese, Bohemians, Albanians, Abyssinians, Armenians,
Scotch, Puritans, Baptists, Russians, etc.).

But to approach the question absolutely fairly and clearly,
it has to be worded thus: Why does the author (and for
that, the vast majority of scientists) reject Jehovah's claim
as being the highest god? Of course Jehovah himself claims
only through his believers and they base almost all their rea-
sons of belief, as far as they have any, upon a certain ancient
book for which they claim "inspiration." Hence, as none
of the compilers of this book live, it becomes again that
odious ancestor-rule. The dead and buried are made to rule
our beliefs, not the living, if we accept the biblical teaching.

Allowing for a moment that the Bible is "inspired," we
have to define what that means. In the consensus of opin-
ion it means that Jehovah watched, influenced, guided the
writers to write only "his word." Under "Bible" we have
treated the palpable absurdity or rather incredibility of this
supposition. But even admitting that the Bible contained
only truths about Jehovah, what is he according to his own
book? He created the world out of nothing in six days.
Can there be made any logical idea, suggestion, hint or even
dream of what existed before that? How and where did

Jehovah exist from eternity of the past? His book gives not
one hint of that immensity of time. Shall we be satisfied
with that limitation? Is this a deep God who takes six days
to make the world, when we can conceive ourselves (see
electric or gravitative brain) of a being that could produce
the entire thought and creation in an instant. Pantheos in
the illionth rapid stage is way beyond Jehovah for grandeur.
Then follows the story; all those one hundred millions of
stars invisible to the naked eye, to 999,999 out of 1,000,000
even to-day are created solely for the illumination at night
of one small dirt ball, the earth. Jehovah becomes here
again too petty. Then he makes a man g^ter his image.
Which is "his image,^^ the Caucasian, Mongol, Negro, Ainc>
or Bushman? If the Negro is his image, why not the Chim-
panzee? This "image" has puzzled the author conscien-
tiously, while yet a Jehovah believer. Is not the other read-
ing with a. little transposition "and man made God after his
image" far more correct? Then Jehovah found that Adam,
whom he had created a male, was not happy with his un-
satisfied sexual desires. What a glaring childish inconsist-
ency for Jehovah, who must have had the idea of sexes when
he began world making, to create only one-half. This repre-
sents Jehovah like a child making a snow man, but not
giving him any body, only arms, legs and head. This crea-
tion story is extremely unsatisfactory to any fair thinker; it
is too shallow, too childishly absurd, too unacceptable for
grown-up intellects. Well, Jehovah made Adam. Why did
he give to lonely Adam, if he was Jehovah's image, his
sexual organs and every one of the 10,000 organs found
exactly identical in a chimpanzee? Is Jehovah patterned
after the Chimpanzee, or the latter after Jehovah? The
Bible gives not a hint for this curious "accident." He
made Eve out of a rib of Adam. What a childish story!
Then, Adam should be one rib short. At the same time
it is strange that, excepting the sexual organs, Eve in the
aggregate is identical with Adam; again that "accident" of
qualitative identity with the C^himpanzee. Adam and Eve
live in the garden of Eden; Jehovah visits them and, like
a father, seems to like the results of his sculptor efforts. He
wants to try their moral machinery, to see whether he made
a good job of it; so he has a tree with particularly tempting

fruit, of which he forbids them to eat. Those poor inex-
perienced unsophisticated children of mud, not even having
any parents or education at all, because education presup-
poses the existence of evil of which they knew nothing as
yet, were expected to stand against the temptation of a Je-
hovah — the highest God, — aided by the snake. Does not the
"Lord^s prayer'^ say, Lead us not into temptation? Does
not that imply that Jehovah sometimes offers unfair temp-
tation? No man objects to a fair temptation. But those
poor young folks ate the fruit of that apple tree; and forth-
with the world became as it is; the evil, the labor, the toil all
sprouted from that apple tree. What a shallow childish
view of Jehovah! First, if he was all knowing, he must
have known beforehand that Adam and Eve would eat the
apple, that the snake would beguile the young woman, that
misery would follow; yet he made the trap for them; he al-
lowed the snake to talk to them! Who is guilty? Evi-
dently not the puppets in a Punch and Judy show, who
commit all sorts of crimes against each other, but their
director, and as he (Jehovah) cannot offend himself, nobody
was offended, nobody guilty except Jehovah. This wrath of
Jehovah is only comparable to that of the little girl who
placed her doll at the table with her elbows on her plate
and then whipped the doll because it had put its elbow on
the table.

The temptation story in Eden makes Jehovah so small
that he becomes unacceptable to the grown intellect.

"He placed angels and a flaming sword at the east en-
trance of the Paradise.'^ Until four hundred years ago even
intelligent Christians literally believed this story; the spread
of geography has not found a trace of the Paradise or the
angel. Did Jehovah get tired of it and withdraw the sen-
tinel; have the weeds overrun his paradise? Any fair in-
tellect will simply conclude: There never was a "paradise.^*
Then "Adam and Eve discovered their nakedness." That
is nothing specifically human; the bitch does the same thing;
besides primitive man of to-day in the tropics "knows not
that he is naked/' where the climate allows this. When
Jehovah pronounced his curse upon Adam he pronounced
the seed for the progress and for the nineteenth century de-
velopment. His £iii>cial curse upon women: "Thy desire

shall be to thy husband, thou shalt be his slave/' is fre-
quently translated very mildly not to grate harshly on the
ears of the nineteenth century woman, who fill the pews and
support Jehovah's agents. His curse upon the snake, "Dust
shalt thou eat," has plainly not come true, for not one snake
eats dust; all of them eat little animals, etc. Thus the story
in Genesis runs chapter after chapter; hardly a logical phrase
or action, nothing but childish doll actions and doll talk.
Let us never lose sight of this. If Jehovah is the God he
has several illions of worlds to look after and to have even
a small fraction of him talking to Noah is an absurd exag-
geration of the importance of man because as a true God
he has far more powerful and subtle means for making him-
self manifest; a true God uses no club where an emotion will
suflSce. The story of the great flood has been treated in de-
tail too often to need again criticism. Every nation at some
time has been in the presence of unusual high water. To
ascribe it to rain is insufficient, if the flood was one to rise
to the summit of Ararat — 16,000 feet! Even on the moisted
tropical day the entire atmosphere can contain only one and
one-half foot of water, if it was all precipitated at once; hence
utterly insufficient for more than local floods. Even the
ocean, spread over the entire earth, would not give half the
height of Mt. Ararat. And if the "sluices of heaven^' were
opened, where are they? Not inside of our solar system;
only ice could reach us from the universe. If that amount
of water had come from the universe, enough to reach to the
summit of Mt. Ararat (16,000 feet), it would have been ice
of 400** F. below zero (200° C.) and it would have needed
twelve hundred years of constant sunshine to melt it; or
if it had struck with the natural velocity of fall, the heat
evolved would not only have been enough to melt this ice,
but even create heat enough to evaporate as steam all the
water on the globe and itself twelve times over, or our earth
would have become red hot on the surface by the impact.
Hence no large quantity of water can have come from the
universe. Noah's ark would have to have been asbestos or
fire brick, steel clad.

"And of all the animals he took one pair." Thousands of
collectors in hundreds of museums, aided by ten thousands
of assistants have not suc^peded in one hundred years to

collect one pair of every species of animals. "Unless we as-
sume again the childish miracle interference of a clay-
Bculptor-god, the tigers needed warmblooded animals, the
humming birds insects, the elephants leaves and fruit, the
anteaters ants, — the latter cannot eat anything else with^
their toothless mouths opening only one-half inch wide and
their foot-long ribbon-like sticky tongue. Did he have mi-
croscopes .to catch the millions of species of microscopic ani-
mals? Would not that have been a good occasion to rid the
world of cobras, vipers, — ^unless Noah took "dust" to feed
them? That flood and ark story is a hopeless absurdity in
connection with Jehovah and Noah; it is a common natural
exaggeration of a true happening, without them. The flood
story may be a dim memory of the end of the glacial period
about 7,000 B. C. The ark was much too small for only one
pair. There are, e. g., eight species of elephants, ten of
rhinoceros, one hundred and fifty of cattle, etc. Did he
forget the mammoth?

Then comes the tower of Babel. Here we strike the first
historically traceable foundation for a Jehovah story. Some
such tower exists; even the confusion of language may have
existed then, but that Jehovah would be jealous of even a
10,000 foot tower is again so utterly childish as to be inad-
missible. "To build it into the heaven" supposes a blue
glass shell around us about 1,000 or 10,000 feet away, and
evidently Jehovah shared that hypothesis.

Then the stories of the Jews, the ten commandments, all
historical- enough and intelligible enough without Jehovah,
are childish, small, even ridiculous with Jehovah. Every-
where Jehovah, if he is at all there, is represented as a rather
vulgar invisible man, resentful and unaccountable; here ap-
pears also more and more lucidly the purpose of Jehovah
stories, to give a foundation for priest rule. Of the ten
commandments the first three are plainly business devices of
the growing priest rule; the fourth is a Chinese idea; the
fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth are common to all collections
of people; they are borrowed from Greeks, Egyptians, Baby-
lonians, etc.; they are rules of conduct without which no
community is possible; the ninth and tenth are more ele-
vated and are truly refined, really progressive command-
ments; unfortunately too slightly considered, but even they

are only negative. If they were observed no railing against
*^the power of wealth-^ or "plutocracy'^ would be noticeable.
By placing those three seK-serving commandments at the
head^ the priests have speculated well on the shortness of
average intellect, which truly cannot count beyond five as
yet; hence some get as far as the fifth, some to the eighth,
very few to the tenth commandment.

AH through the old testament Jehovah is too childish, too
pettyfogging, too small to be truly satisfactory to a normal
adult intellect. The Jehovah idea lacks entirely depth. It
becomes a mere personal whim matter of Jehovah whether
one thing or another is done. It admits that Jehovah is
subject to laws because he gets angry or is pleased, evi-
dently a case of cause and effect or, what is called in sciences
a law.

Now, as to Christ and the new testament. Why did
Christ come into the world? To save mankind? Only indi-
rectly. He came to atone to Jehovah for the terrible wrong
done to him and fearful wrath excited in him by the act of
two raw untutored young persons eating supposedly four
thousand years' ago, somewhere, an apple they were for-
bidden to eat, being partly induced by a snake which Je-
hovah allowed to roam in the garden and talk to those in-
tellectual babies. This is the idea of the atonement in a
nutshell. If Jehovah was the God, he must have fore-
seen that apple incident, must have known that he would
get terribly excited and wrathy, must have foreseen that he
would have to sacrifice his own adopted son to appease
the wrath and yet, he let it all come to pass. Why? Be-
cause he wanted it to happen or because he is only a small
sub-god who did not foresee and who in the cycle of Pantheos
was merely a tool to the end. If he wanted it to happen, he
is an unaccountable being and logical man is not "made after
his image;'' if he wanted it to happen, the entire world is
merely a dream of Jehovah in which he tortures himself or
plays makebeliefs to himself; the world becomes in its en-
tiety a sham and toy of Jehovah. Is not the view of Je-
hovah being merely a small cog in the Pantheos machinery
much more elevated, logical and acceptable? We have here
supposed for an instant Christ to be really the son of God.
Was he? Nothing in his sayings is beyond the wisdom of

the wisest Jew of his time; his miracles are all either ridicu-
lous or badly proven; the prophesies referring to him are so
vague* that they can refer to one thousand others. But
most conclusive of all, he is dead. Can a true God really
die? Not even in human shape, because he, a God, knows
the laws of the body, its working and organs so as to avoid
death by any cause except suicide. Hence if Christ was
God and died, he died by suicide. His ascension is a palpable
falsehood; if he could not live without food then, he could
not make the human body live twenty-four hours in the
terrible cold of the universe (400° F.), which is reached in
less than 50,000 feet height. To heap miracle on miracle is
not Godlike. Any fool can suppose anything done by sup-
posing another "miracle;^^ only a true God can do things by
the deep knowledge of the laws of life as embodied in the
molecules and atoms. In none of his teaching does Christ
reach the best teachings of Socrates, Plato, Zoroaster, Budda
and even Mahommet combined; hence his standing at the
very best is only about at their level, but at no god-like dis-
tance beyond them. His specific philosophy is, shorn of all
"reverential" fol de rol:

Christ is the son of Jehovah, bom by sexual union of a
God and a Jewish maiden. Christ is the Messiah promised
in the old testament, as far as that can be made out. All
property is a snare of the Devil; the body is a damnable, vile,
contaminated prison. "Do not care for the morrow, do not
ask what shall we eat or how shall we live." "Give every-
thing to the poor and become a homeless, tradeless, wander-
ing preacher. I shall return soon after my death in body
and erect a great material Kingdom in Palestine and Syria.
I must die to become endowed with greater power and greater
influence. My death will be a sacrifice so that by it all
people will be relieved from the consequences of Adam and
Eve eating an apple against Jehovah^s command. I shall
not lose anything by dying, but become a great power about
60 A. D.

If we analyze this synopsis we find that following of the
precepts of Christ would transform the entire world into a
world of homeless beggars, as it actually did in the early
middle ages when only unredeemed Jews and Arabs held
property. His expectation of an early return to material

personal power were like those of hundreds who died like
him, not fulfilled; every passage in the Bible about the King-
dom to come refers to this expected event, which never hap-
pened. That Christ died for an idea is entirely human;
there is no folly, no grand idea, no foolish childishness, no
exalted virtue, no brutality and no refined, ideal for which
thousands have not died. The anarchists in Chicago died
for an idea, — no matter what its value, — ^the Southern sol-
diers died for an idea, the Chinese who fought in the
Opium war died for an idea; Guiteau was hanged for an
idea; Garfield died for another idea. The millions of mar-
tyrs for Christ make the "sacrifice of Christ" appear a very
expensive one, if measured by life; the crusades were idea
vs. idea; hence, in dying for an idea Christ was thoroughly
human, not at all Godlike. A God knows how to carry his
idea into life without dying; man has to do it by his death;,
hence Christ was a man.

With Jehovah appearing, even by his own narrative, as a
small peevish overgrown child, and Christ, his "son," as an
unpractical visionary, unattractive, unclean, slovenly, unpro-
gressivcxman, is it to be wondered that neither is accepted as
the God by all people who are in a non-terrorstricken,
sound, healthy condition of mind?

Viewed deeper, the story of Jehovah may be the story of
the entrance of the idea and the entity "Jehovah" into the
human center of consciousness. But whether this entity be
an element from some other planet, or a new species of mi-
crobe, or a new wave impulse, as far as shown up to date,
it does not appear radically superior or even eminently differ-
ent from those already constituting the human Ego. Je-
hovah, as represented by Christ beyond his own selfish in-
terests, seems not to exert in any manner a markedly bene-
ficial effect on the entire man possessed by him; the Ameri-
can prisons are filled with devout Jehovah believers (Irish);
in no depari;ment except the self -centered Jehovah cult does
the devout Spaniard seem superior to the "atheistic" Japan-
ese or German; the latter's sense of rigjht and wrong, fair
and unfair, logical and absurd, is much more nicely devel-
oped than that of the pious Spaniard. Only with the break-
down of Puritanism did the growth of the United States
really begin; the United States constitution began progress

by omitting from it Jehovah. This possession of some Egos
is the reward of Christ for his death; this is his Kingdom
in which his apostles have their places of power.

The original Jehovah as living in the true Jews has been
compelled to see bulwark after bulwark fall; his altars scent
but feebly to-day of the burnt flesh; his priests hold only a
shadow of their former power; he still gets his piece of skin,
but his high priest sits in some back room paying rent -to
the followers of his son or even some infidels.

Right here a definition of an infidel suggests itself; it is
that of a human being whose Ego is not possessed or pre-
dominatingly infected or occupied by any specific humanifi-
cation of a religious ideal. It is the normal human mind
free from religious infection. At the same time, as it is not
always pleasant to be too entirely independent, we accept
voluntarily a dominion, — ^not a slavery — of some ideal which
we call religion; the author finds Pantheism the deepest,
most satisfactory; only it appears somewhat as if, in reach-
ing for the Pantheos beyond Jehovah, beyond Allah, beyond
Wotan and even Brama, there was a long journey ahead,
before a more tangible personality than the Ego would be
encountered. The Jehovah, Brama and Allah ideas help, so
to speak, people along in that they are made to feel that
there are many of them, even if they wander only in a circle.
The Pantheist, while surrounded with phases of Pantheos,
sets himself the task of so perfecting his Ego that, by natural
process, even, if necessary^ without the guiding hand of a
sub-god, he may reach the next personally perceptible phase
beyond himself; the difference between a Christian, for in-
stance, and a true Pantheist, is in their aims more than in
the pure beliefs; aims are our future, beliefs — ^not faiths —
are dead and buried issues.

The Christian hopes and believes that by simply dying he,
all at once, he will be endowed with all knowledge, if he
only dies firmly believing that Christ is the God.

The Pantheist says: Within true justice this is not to
be expected. We cannot expect to harvest where we did not
sow. Tilling the soil only gives a harvest; no amount of
belief will produce a bushel of potatoes. Faith is not be-
lief. Hence we will find after death, when we reappear,
only the fruits of our present sowing awaiting us, not an

ounce more; for the belief we may find some sort of in-
tellectual reward or even ])unishment, if we cultivated a lazy
illogical belief, but as belief is greatly a matter of parents,
inheritance and early training, the result of pure belief will
probably be small and unimportant either way. In only
one thing does Pantheism require a stout heart. Almost
every religion closes the cycle of man's labor with its notion
as to the hereafter. Pantheism alone opens a vista of end-
less reappearances, births, deaths, up and down movements
of the Egos, of body and soul until they elaborate by their
own innate possibilities combining with congenial phases
of Pantheos, their destinies, becoming part of more and more
complex phases of Pantheos, realizing and consciofying (ren-
dering conscious) more and more of the world's forces and
phases of Pantheos until in the illionth future they have
become conscious of all phases of Pantheos. We will prob-
ably find our next phase not to be essentially different from
our present one, because, if it was, we could not understand
it; it may even be that in the very final development of
man here on earth we develop our next Pantheos, perfect-
ing it, until falling into the Sun, we tranrfer the results
to some solar beings, hence to some being in a leonis, etc.
We may even learn how to leave the Earth and to find
a place congenial for ages on Jupiter or on a planet of
Skius. The bare possibility of leaving the earth cannot
be denied; the light of a lamp in our streets passes every
second into the endless universe, travelling on until stopped.
When we once know precisely what the Ego is, will we be
able to manage it; hence Pantheos puts as an aim: Know
thyself, be no sub-god's slave. Christianity says: Neglect
thyself, become a slave of the Jehovah family. The author
has given Jehovah a full, fair trial, and found him unsatis-
factory, shallow, unjust, no matter whether he exists or
not; let others try Pantheos in an equally fair way.

V.
OUR BRAINS.

By no other test is the crudeness, lowness and utter
childishness of the general education of humanity every-
where shown as strikingly as by the amount of average knowl-
edge about the brains. The very fact that many people sup-
pose the mind as something self existing shows this clearly.
Let us not confound mind and soul. The poor demented
has no "mind" in correct meaning, but as we attempt to
show in other chapters it is to-day thoroughly logical to
suppose him endowed with "soul."

The average cart horse knows precisely as much about his
oat-desiring, fly-hating machine between his two ears as the
average man does about his beef -eating, money-desiring skull
stuffing. And a vast amount is really known already about
the brain among the competent ones. A text book used
officially in 1898 describes the brain as a "gelatinous mass,"
just as brilliant a description as that of the Zulu of a loco-
motive as a terrible fire-eating horse without mane and tail

Very many seek in our brain resemblances to dynamoes,
incandescent lights and similar utterly foreign forms of
mechanics. Our brain can only be compared to the sur-
face of our earth. We do not care here to enter into de-
tails, only it would seem fair on the part of the author
to present views which gave him great satisfaction in ex-
plaining — if only one' step in advance — ^brain phenomena.
We only pick out generally interesting features; they are
not fancies, but supported by most recent observations and
investigations. The surface of our brain, spread over many
folds and wrinkles termed sulci consists of from two hun-
dred thousand to five million ganglia. The general type of
a ganglion may be seen from the pictures. Figs. 1,'2, 3; they
are irregularly shaped masses resembling a mass of spider
webs with the spider (called nucleus), inside of which a
still smaller body (nucleolus), not occupying the center but

usually a little away from it. It was only in 1880 that this
structure of the ganghon was discovered by Prof. Heintz-
mann, of New York. Some ganglia have only one outlet,
others four or five, others an almost countless number.

s-Q=ggi];3>

Fig. 1 1b a motiod (i
sUoni the impreaalc

Fl'g. 2 1h a. dyod w'ways) ganBlion-

FlK. 3 Is a polyod (many ways) ganglion, such as coDBtltute the ma-
jority or our brafn aurlace gangUa; sensatlong enter from many direc-
tions and go out In many; ihe diagram illustrates by black dots how
such a ganglion at nber knots may form points recording e, g. a T.
about «m times magnltled.

Fig. t. AU ganglia are aurrounded by a aheatb which Burrounda
also the nerves Taaulng from them aa a tube until they merge Into an-
other ganglion; hence, all our nerves all over the body are sur-
rounded With one continuous sheath; ita Inflammation constitutes
neuralgia- One such nerve after death Ib shown In flg. i about 2.0O0
Umes magnified. While the knobs may be after-death formations,
they show that, during life, at their places, there was a different
structure from the Rtralght roda connecting them; they show the
chain or ball tranamlssion structure.

These ganglia are the nerve cities in v?hich our impressions,
impulses, emotions, thoughts, originate, are received or dwell;
they are more numerous than the cities on earth; from
each more paths lead to others than there are roads on earth;
the white matter of the brain beneath the grey surface layer
of ganglia is a mass of nerve fibers, connecting the ganglia,
each in its little tube, bo aa not to solder together and pro-
duce wrong connections, insanity. They all center at the
center of consciousness, the Egos, which may be located
about midway between the upper edges of the two ears. But
it would he erroneous to liken those paths in their work
to electric wires; the brain speed is very low; as shown
elsewhere, hardly six feet a second, while electricity travels
two hundred thousand miles a second. These nerve con-
nections may be likened far better to threads, chains or
jointed tods, by means of which, by pulling or pushing,
nerve impulses travel, hence more like a bell pull or a
belt or ball transmission.

From many critical observations the author considers the
following division of work as a at present thoroughly logi-
cal suggestion of the operation of the brain.

A sensation of light strikes the eye; the nerve ends of
the optic nerve transform this light into a certain mechani-
cal push which travels through the cones; our seeing ap-
paratus consists of a layer of about a million fine rods or
cones at the bottom of each eye; now, to transmit a million
separate sensations is not economical, hence immediately be-
hind the rods and cones are little ganglia which sum up the
results of about thirty rods each, from them issue nerves
which meet a second group of ganglia which sum each
about fifty of the first ganglia, hence the million impres-
sions have been concentrated into 1,000,000: 30x50, or
about six hundred, these six hundred now travel separately
in the optical nerve into the brain proper, the precise figures
are here not very material. When the sensation along the
optic nerve has entered the brain the real brain work be-
gins. The impression meets — in a well organized brain—
at first a classifying ganglion which instinctively groups
the things seen among "animals,^^ "trees,'^ "faces,^' "food,^*
etc. . . it then passes through recording ganglia and from
there into the proper surface ganglion; or the classifying
ganglion may follow the recording ganglion. When the
sensation has reached its proper surface ganglion and as-
sumed the shape in w^hich the ganglion records it, a mes-
sage is pushed from that surface ganglion through compar-
ing and generalizing ganglia, into the Ego ganglia; acccord-
ing to the nature of the sensation the Ego returns the sen-
sation to the record ganglion with injunction — remember
it! — or the object seen is such as to require action, and it
issues the proper push — or pull — orders to the proper im-
pulse ganglia. Hence we have already five grades of ganglia
in simple seeing. But let us suppose we read print. We
read the word "Darwin,'^ the first sensation travels like all
others until the record ganglion, "names,^^ is reached; there
the name Darwin is found recorded in a manner so that
when it now passes on through ganglia of comparison into
the Egos, one Ego immediately return's the impulse into
ganglia of comparison with such energy that they connect
with record ganglia of zoology, palaeontology,^ biology, evQ-

lution, even religion, and these large ganglia actively ex-
changing nerve pulls and pushes produce the resultant
(thought) going into Ego: "the father of the evolution the-
ory." From Ego it travels outwards weakly into the vocal
cords and we, so to speak, pronounce the thought silently
in our brain; the impulse towards loud pronunciation is har-
moniously thrown back into our brain and becomes a con-
scious thought. Every true conscious thought is a silently
pronounced thought; hence, our centers for vocal nerves
and language nerves are the true fathers of human thought.
Even the person bom deafmute has neryes of expression by
eyes or hands and his conscious thoughts are return im-
pulses from the centers of those means of expression. This
explains, also, why animals show only such imperfect con-
scious thought, because their outward expression of them
is so imperfect. The question which existed first, hen or
egg, now answered by: The egg, occurs also here. Which
was first, thought or language? Some idealists may decide
that man was first full of thought and invented language
to give vent to them; others may say, man babbled first and
then learnt to babble silently, which was thought. To-day
the author cannot think a single thought that is not an
unpronounced sentence, and as such passes even through the
central nerves of hearing — although not the outer ear —
and is then remembered. It is questionable whether we
could remember our thoughts as we do if they did not re-
turn to our brain by such a silent normal route of eyes
or ears; our conscious thoughts are therefore return im-
pulses of our organs for showing thoughts outwardly. Now,
this return impulse or first silent thought comes to our
nerves like a real thing seen or heard, it is again classified,
recorded, reported through ganglia of comparison to the
Egos and again goes out as a new next sequence of thought.
When our brain thus plays with its own impulses and im-
pressions we say we are thinking about something. In well
organized brains this process is quite rapid, thought fol-
lows thought, but it is essentially always the internal cir-
cuit from eye or ear to nerve center of tongue back to
ganglia. The author is not capable of a conscious thought
that does not bring with it a desire or readiness to be pro-
nounced, hence a thought must go as far as to be the

nerve step of a correct impulse to the nerves of language
to become conscious thought. Nay, even more, few thoughts
are possible to the author that do not shape themselves into
a specific language, although he is absolutely and completely
master of several; thus 7X8=56 he writes immediately
without any language, but if he gives an instant more time
for it, they appear in the language just then, so. to speak,
.on tap. In those not gifted with language a similar circuit
must be made to constitute a thought through the nerves
of the organs by which they can express thought. Thus
every one has observed a dog e. g. standing alone on the
sidewalk; he is quiet; all at once he wags his tail and
trots off somewhere; that wagging of the tail was the out-
ward sign of a thought of that dog; a deaf mute's thoughts
are self returning circuitous impressions travelling to the
nerves which would make the thought an act if he cared
to act. We are enabled to now define good logic as a train
of thoughts of such perfection that the final thought is
identical with the direct result which the real instead of
thought impressions on the brain would have produced.
This may seem a little involved, but if to illustrate further:
,We see a bird; we may say we obtain a real impression of
a bird, in our brain, and if we imagine in perfect logic a
birdji that thought picture — if perfect logic — ^is identical with
the .real picture. '

The real picture travels: eye, optic nerve, recording gan-
glion, classifying ganglion, record ganglion: birds; ganglion
of comparison. Ego; ganglia of internal brain processes, rec-
ord ganglion. The thought picture travels: Impulse from
some ganglion. Ego, ganglia internal brain processes; record
ganglion: birds — ^ganglia classification, recording ganglion —
!back to recording ganglion, classifying ganglion — ganglion of
record, of comparison. Ego, of brain processes, tongue, Ego,
etc. Hence the thought picture travels a much more com-
plex route; everybody can try it, how he has to make an
effort to get together a good picture of e. g. a penguin. If
he sees one it is an instant almost and the full picture is
,there, but to construct it in thought, as well as possible, shows
by its slowness, the ransacking of many ganglia of record,
l:hat it is a far more circuitous process. When we construct
such a picture we observe ourselves asking ourselves: Has

it long or short feet? This question is the pronounced form
of the enquiring pull which the ganglion of comparison
makes among ganglia of record; this is a specific odd pull
so that only the stored picture of a penguin could satisfy
it.' Nothing comes. The ganglion of record pulls all over;
the tusk of the elephant^ horn of rhinoceros, bill of peli-
can, foot of duck, etc., rush rapidly through the pull; the
ganglion of comparison pulls the record ganglion of reiading,
finds a clipping there: "A wingless bird in far north,^'
with that it builds up a something like a child and labels
it: "This is a penguin, and that is the best I, Johnny
Brown, can do."

How do our brains store records or, as we call it, re-
tain impressions?

Is it in shape of molecular changes like a photograph
plate or by a specific code, or is it in the shape of actual
pictures? Considering the absolute perfection of photo-
graphic and phonographic records we have to deny this
form of storage, except perhaps within the Egos; our best
brains store far less within the brains proper. Hence, it
must be some kind of specific code. We have in our ganglia
webs of fine threads of protoplasm (nerve substance) which

as in knitting by forming contacts (or knots) can thereby
form an alphabet of record in whicli everytliing may bo
recorded as the act of weaving shows; or even, they may,
by those knots, form outline pictures of objects seen and
sound pictures of notes heard. In the first case a bird
would be stored about thus:

color green red I beak: Blender I size; pigeon

eangllon of record 10 ganglion of record 95 I ganglion of record 6

(colors). I (mouths). I (glzea).

There is no question to the author that some brains store
in this analytical manner and think again reverse, syntheti-
cally the bird together from its parts.

But much more common appears to the author, because
his own reproductions assume such forms, the storing of
objects in a complete bead picture, very much resembling
the Chinese word character of embroidered pictures; a leaf
e. g. to be stored so that the lines of fibers in the ganglion

DiagTam of a surface gangUon of record: Birds in general, no. 26,
lustratlng ingotnE and oulgolng nerves and connections; probably
0« times enlarged; the ganglia are not flat, but have depth which
innot be aliown In a drawing, so that a bird is depleted not as a

intersecting each other and soldering together form a dotted
dim outline of the object seen.

The different diagrammatic forms of nerves issuing from
this ganglion, illustrate how, e. g., a of this ganglion would
transmit a proper pull only to a similar a of another gan-
glion, but not through b; how a wave motion, long enough
for c, would be unable to pass through d; these differences
give a suggestion of the reason for the difference of sensa-
tions transmitted. If, e. g., the oak leaf is made up of c
fibers, the rose leaf of d fibers, a sensation from them will
only be accepted by ganglia having those c and d fibers, but
no others.

This shows how two o^ five or more leaves may be stored
by dots from only twenty or thirty fibers in a ganglion.
In chapter of Pantheos we have referred to synthetic geom-
etry; its principles apply also here.

We are thus far able to make out within the brain proper:

A recording ganglion — may be several, certainly one for
each sense, which transforms the original impression upon
eye or ear or nose into a proper nerve push or pull, such
as may be received and accepted by the ganglia of record. —
A. B. C. D., etc.

Classifying ganglia, well developed in good brains, poorly
developed in low grade brains, which direct the impulses
from recording ganglia into the proper ganglia of record. —
I, II, III, IV, etc.

Ganglia of record, the most numerous, occupying essen-
tially the entire surface of the brain probably in fine brains
more than a million; they hold the actual records; their con-
nections form four-fifths of the entire white mass of the
brain — 1 to . . . 1,000,000 or more.

Ganglia of comparison, a deeper set, capable of setting
themselves into communication with several ganglia of rec-
ord at once and comparing, summing up their contents. — ^a,
b, c, d. . . .

Ganglia of second comparison, generalization, still more
concentrating the result of the foregoing -a, /J, y, 6, e
(Greek) — ^thus far unconscious.

Ganglia of consciousness, Egos, self (labelled here I^, I^,
P, etc.) rendering thought conscious.

The thought has travelled thus far as a pure impression.

but to make it a thought ready for loud or silent pronun-
ciation or action it has to pass from Ego outward as an
impulse to

General ganglia of impulses — ^here labelled, -^a,—y,—6.

General ganglia of special organs (a — b — c — d).

Special ganglia of special muscles of the organs — 1 — 2 — 3
etc.

Muscular nerves — I — II — III, etc. Muscles — ^A — ;B — C.

In silent thought the impulse having gone from A — B — C,
as far as — 1 — 2, etc., has not strength enough to set up
muscular play ( — IV-a); it returns like a return wave,
reaches again the Egos and becomes a rounded conscious
thought, as such finally thrown by a, y, etc., through
a, b, c. etc., into specific ganglia of record (e. g. 901, 920,

d, b, g, 989, 680, etc.), of our own thoughts. For, there is
no question that a person has to remember his own thoughts
very frequently; it is a great saving if a certain thought has
not to be, so to speak, re-thought again and again, but can
be rapidly reproduced by a well recording ganglion of record,

e. g., "My own thoughts,'' 989, 640.

These letters and figures are here merely used to save
verbiage; of absolutely no other significance.

The brains of most people resemble a drawer into which
promiscuously, locomotives, buildings, elephants, horses,
friends, dogs, mountains, children, music and shrieks are
tumbled, while a well organized brain represents a cabinet
with many drawers and shelves all well labelled and judi-
ciously arranged. At the same time the brain is full of
short routes frequently supplied from the specific nerve
system of the body proper, the so called (erroneously and
misleading) sympathetic system. This sympathetic system
is a system of nerves, almost independent of the brain, not
capable of giving pain or pleasure itself, but capable of
influencing muscular action; where pain seems to arise from
it, it is from nerves of the cerebral system; it should be
called the corporal system of nerves distinguished from the
cerebral or the system of the soul. It keeps the body alive
during sleep, regulates breathing, digestion, heart beats, etc.,
and performs also within the brain important functions of
so to speak looking out for the interests of the body as
opposed to the cerebral system. Thus sleep is produced by

"> 1

it; the movement of the iris to adjust itself to light is one
small function, the cutting off of sound in sleep another
one, etc. But the following example shows also other forms
of its action:

We see something: the sensation travels . . . eye .
cones . . . first small ganglia . . . second small ganglik
. . . optic nerve ... A ... II .. . 62531 . . .
c . : , y , . . P, etc.; but before it has reached P, be*-,^
fore we know what we are seeing, our eyelids have shut, our
hand has gone up to ward off the danger — this short cut,
through the most rapid nerves, was through nerves of th*
corporal system; now, one-eighth of a second after our arm
is already up in defense, I^, realizes that it was a piece of
stone flying towards us. The nerves of the corporal system
act in executing the thought: "Never mind what you see
now, you can think about it later at leisure, now we musl
first think of safety and defense of the body/^ Even within
the brain certain impressions and impulses, having to travel .
shorter routes reach their destination before those having to
travel longer ones.

We always make the distinction between impression and
impulse that the first is a nerve action travelling from the
senses towards the Egos, produced by some external effect
on the senses; the latter a command from the Ego travelling
outward towards our organs of action.

This difference of speed of impulses owing to different
length of paths is well illustrated by the following example:

Somebody calls us a "fool" or a "liar." The sound im-
pression travels through F, IX, into 62, through d, a into
I^ and I^, a rapid impulse through - y (resentment) into -d
(general body muscles) into -4, -9, -80, etc., makes us clench
our fists, raise our arms, — but all at once frantic pulls amve
from within: Don't strike! Our I^ and I^ have through 4, c,
w, a,, 1820, 9450, 6150, etc., so to speak made a comparison
of fighting resources; the result comes back, aided by re-
sults of "looking the man over:" He is much bigger! hence
the bodily nerves add their influence, by connecting 5180
(record of former fights), 120620 (disgrace of a row), etc.;
we scowl — simply an outlet of the very first impulse towards
other muscles — our ganglion of bad words. (13) is called
on, we return his insulting words, but our fists unclench.

we calm down outwardly, but what is left of the first ini'
pulse now roves all over our body. Unless we have a large
well organized ganglion (1^ or a) ready to store this rem-
nant^ we are riled for days, until in the form of bad temper,
etc., the impulse of fighting has worn itself out. These
ganglia for storing lost impulses are termed in popular
language as philosophy, religion, resignation, even "temper."
These impulses are never really lost.* A well directed brain
may later on utilize them as impulses to cultivate the body
or mind, develop special aptitudes, methods of life, etc. In
a badly organized brain these impulses, while momentarily
repressed, having no high storage ganglion, roving about
the brain, may make the entire brain community so rest-
less that it can see only in "revenge" a release from the
unwelcome, as yet unsatisfied, 'impulse. The revenge is
here nothing but the original impulse, perhaps even inten-
sified by nursing.

The impulse following a certain impression is therefore
dependent on exceedingly complex factors, among others on
the Egos. Within those the impression assumes for an in-
stant an entirely and radically different character to be re-
turned in the now greatly changed form of impulse. The
transformation of the impression to impulse within the Egos
lies as yet very deep.

The diagrammatic path of e. g. seeing and pronouncing
"7" may be expressed as shown on page 57.

The dotted lines show the path; the letters and figures
indicate the diagrammatic character of the ganglia:

It will be seen what a complex road even such a simple
impression has to travel. The eye receives the impression —

i t n § » ■ » ■ •

Fig 1. Piff. 2. Fig. 3. Pig. 4.

reversed — like a mosaic (Fig. 1); the white spots are reported
diflferently from the black ones, the result is summed up
partly in ganglia |, about like Fig. 2; in ganglia J the im-

•They represent the hidden remnant of back action which may
appear in millions of years now as "justice**— see chapter Justice.

pression is etiil more Eummed up, about like Fig. 3; while
in A & B it is already fini^ed, like figure 4 and reversed.
I, II, III, etc., are classifying ganglia and e. g. 243 is the
ganglion of record: figures; of course it finds already a 7
there, although of different type, but the ganglion of record .
243 transmits the impression to a, where it is found that ear

ganglion, S160, (English language) has a sound for it
"seven;" the two impressions jointly are transmitted to a
further comparing ganglion (s) which transmits to the Ego
only the sound equivalent, returns the picture to 243; Ego
I' sends out impulse to pronounce through i. m. 2160 to -^
from there it goes to voice ganglion -p, into special voice
muscle ganglia, -412, -410, -411, from there to special muscle

ganglia -II, -IX, -XVI, etc., the muscles (-T -4, etc.), are
moved and "seven^"* is pronounced. If another language is
desired, this has been expressed before and has resulted in
connecting a with e. g. 490620, German; as soon as the im-
pression arrives in b it is connected with 490620, and the
same process followed, resulting in pronouncing "sieben.^*
But if the person had learned German only a little by sound
so that iiis German ganglion was as yet merely an attach-
ment (2161) to English ganglion 2160, the impression would
pass into 2160, from 2160 into 2161 (German appendix),
from there to Ego and go out as an imperfect
"seeven." It will be seen from this example that a
language ganglion may be a sight or a sound gan-
glion. Thus the writer once learned Turkish en-
tirely from books and a description of the sounds; the
ganglion of record of Turkish was here entirely a visual
ganglion, but connected as for "sounds within the ganglion
of comparison with sounds from other languages. He had
not heard one syllable of Turkish pronounced before com-
ing to Constantinople, but when he heard it, it passed through
comparison ganglion into the book ganglion "Turkish" and
was understood, although the understanding was far inferior
to the speaking capacity. Of course, the Turks understood
much easier his imperfect sounds, than he could assimilate
their perfect sounds with his other language sounds; as the
writer had a good vocabulary and grammar in Turkish he
was constantly swamped by their rapid talk, because they
could not imagine that a person speaking their language
quite fluently, correctly, although oddly, should have such
difficulty in comprehending them. After about two weeks
the sounds had formed a special new ganglion "Turkish
language," and the improvement was rapid. Our words are
inadequate to describe odd or new sounds, hence the diffi-
culty of learning three Turkish ch (German sound) was great.
Thus, no European language can describe the pronunciation
of "Tchetwayo," the Zulu chief. It would be "cluck-wayo"
in English; in German (Schnalzer-wayo), etc. Dg is the
nearest of letter analysis, but much too gentle and soft. As
soon as fixed signs for fixed sounds are used, we can imi-
tate them well, but not where all signs are wanting. Thus
the English th is utterly indescribable to a Frenchman or

German. Jugt try it. The grammar in those languages
says: "To pronounce th, approach the tongue to the up-
per teeth, letting them rest on it slightly, open the mouth
more on the upper than lower hp, and blow through the
Bpaces betwtsen tongue and upper teeth." Have you got
it? The first results of pupils are: Spt! ^pss! ar, sbs, sds,
ds! etc. Hence the French pupil says he "spits English"
and "coughs German;" while the German pupil says he "spits
English" and "grunts French."

Many oddities of brains are explicable by this diagram:
Thus there are persons who see objects, recognize them as
familiar but cannot name them; others hear a word and im-
mediately know what it means; in the first case the path
as far as Ego from Eye to Ego is good, but the connection
from Ego to language and tongue imperfect, by either the
ganglion " — s — " names of objects, being poorly developed
or the general connecting road barren of numerous fibers;
in the second case, far more common the original storing
of the ganglion of record came through the ear (or reading)
not the eye. Eeading is a complex storing of ganglia of rec-
ord, through the language ganglia; hence the path in
reading is about thus:

In reading we have not to forget that we do not read
anything except a succession of black dots, loops, dashes
and geometrical shapes on a white background; they go as

far as e. g. , IV, before they become reading at all; here
the claBSifying ganglia (reading) IV and IX, ewitchea the
aeiiBatioQ into "ganglion of spelling e.g. No. 65; from there
has been educated in childhood a path into ganglion e. g.
295, language; combining there together, the impressions
now pass into ganglion of record by ganglia connected with
395 (from the ear), a sound recording ganglion N, —
a new classifying ganglion e. g. CII, into the same ganglion
of record e. g. 985297 of astronomy — if that is the sub-
ject of the book — which, from the eyes receives the direct
visual record of the stars and the cosmos; from there to
comparative, b, and generalizing, ganglia p, into the Egos,
the silent voice ganglia, -w and -p, and consciously back into
985S99 (to be stored, "book astronomy"). Of course now
we have practiced^ the path so often that it has made itself
a short, easy, rapid route, but we all remember how we
slowly delved out: "The earth is not perfectly round but
sphseroidal ;" how we first evolved sense, then hunted all
over our brains for sphseroidal and found only an unsatis-
fied impulse left, which our father had to quiet.

When we first learned reading the first thing was for the
recording ganglion e. g. A to form a classifying gan-
glion IV, for reading matter; the first day at school we
shouted ay because others did so; but the first bud of the
classifying ganglion IV, was formed; it grew day by day
until it became a full grown ganglion. The process may be
illustrated tbus:

That nerves and ganglia form offshoots and even pierce
quite a distance through tissues is a phenomenoD wdl ob-

served in surgery; in case of wounds the severed ends of
nerves from both sides, during the process of healing, push
olTshoots into the new tissue until they are again united.

In the childish brain, at first, the entire brain acts like
one ganglion and many brains never go very far beyond
that stage, but soon areas become cultivated, so to speak,
become more and more ill led with records, so that the nerve
fibers crowd within the ganglia, causing them to fold and
wrinkle deeper and deeper.

It would be erroneous to conclude from the foregoing that
e. g. these ganglia of record mentioned are small compact
lumps somewhat ranged side by side like peas on a table;
this would be far from the truth; they are merely areas
always rather vaguely defined and so extensively intercon-
nected that even, if e. g. the ganglion of record: fishes, were
destroyed, a sufficiently general record of fishes would re-
main scattered over all other ganglia to still give a fair re-
sult when called upon; it may be merely a more laborious
process.

Everybody has observed that his capacity, aside from all
chances of education, is limited; simply because all the fibers
available for records are used up and so closely connected
that no new records find room. In savages the classifying
ganglia, and the ganglia nearest the Ego are most conspicu-
ously deficient, the same in children. Few children grasp
collective words or generalize well, although they may be
bright in general remembering and even comparing. The
greater the development of the ganglia called by Greek let-
ters p, w, etc., the higher the intellect; some of us may
even be developing ganglia beyond them. The highest de-
velopment from eye to hand is the sketch artist; from ear
to hand the stenographer. The most complex brain action
the author observed was the following:

At a congress of scientists, the official stenographer, a
Russian by birth, was taking the speech of an English-
man in English; while he was thus occupied, a Frenchman
stepped up and conversed with the stenographer in French,
the stenographer all the time continuing to stenograph Eng-
lish and replying to the Frenchman. To stenograph one's
native language is a fine performance, to stenograph a for-
eign language is at least eight times more difficult; but to

do this and converse at the same time in a third (foreign)
language is certainly twenty times more difficult yet.

A musician may have to be rapid, but, except in case
of leaders, his rapidity is not of a complex kind.

This analysis of thought as given in the foregoing may
appear to superficial readers as one leading to "mechanical"
brains. While in general this may be true, it is a mechani-
cality of such diversion that, assuming only ten shades of
difference in the different ganglia between seeing a bird
and pronouncing its name, not less than twelve billion dif-
ferent grades are possible in this simple thought: bird. And
if we consider similar differences in all the million ganglia
no fewer than one sixtyal of thoughts — first thoughts — ^are
possible, or a thought for each man, woman and being from
one hundred thousand years ago, every second, until the
year four hundred thousand of our era. This is much more
than most people think.

Hence it seems logical to say:

A complete conscious thought is a nerve motion circuit
ending at the ganglion of record where it began and pass-
ing through the Ego to the general ganglia of speech or
(in deaf mutes) its equivalent, but not beyond. Memory is
the capacity of ganglia of weaving into their meshes a rec-
ord of impressions which can be reproduced under impulse
from the Egos.

Intellect is the degree of development of the deeper gan-
glia of comparison and generalizations.

Will is an impulse from ganglia not exhausted at the first
action..

No impulse is possible without previous impression.

Short circuits in the brain, before the circuit through the
Egos has acted, are termed involuntary or unconscious and
belong to the ganglia of the body.*

Of the many most interesting details of explanation which
the foregoing suggestions permit, we only pick out a few.
How do we fall in love? We need first an object and a
certain unsatisfied impulse in our brain or body which sees
in the beloved object proper satisfaction. While men and
women have fallen in love with dogs, cats, birds, statues

♦For further details see the author's: Brains and their mechanism.

and pictures, we only study the case of a youth seeing a
certain girl and — falling in love — all other cases for the
present excluded. The picture of the maiden he saw fol-
lowed in his brain the path of all objects seen; it entered
the ganglion of record "faces/- sub-ganglion: strange girls.
The falling in love is not instantaneous, but requires a few
days for full development; that girl picture is brought from
ganglion of record (e. g. No. 2) "faces of girls" through
•comparison to the Egos. Those Egos are complex, that
,of the soul, the body, and perhaps others. As the record
.of the girl's face strikes the Egos, it excites in either that
of the body or the soul, or even in the combined one a curi-
ously harmonious action; this action may come even from
the very interior of the Egos. The Egos are compounds,
■each has probably not fewer than thirty-two eighteenals of
atoms; each atom is a world like ours in itself; hence the
-picture of that girl enters into the atoms; it may appear
there like a bright star or like a gentle breeze; the atoms
may even analyze so to speak all the atoms of the girl pic-
ture and therein, in what we may term sexual affinity, kin-
dred to chemical affinity, find the very best girl that yet
•presented itself for the best progress — ^which includes hap-
piness — of the entire individual and his deep seated des-
tiny, which is well mapped out within the atoms of the
Egos by their laws, although beyond our human coarse shal-
low intellect for many millenia to come. The Egos may
recognize within the face, manners, motions of that maiden.
Egos of the Past and Future which would desire to com-
bine with certain Egos within the lad just as violently as
•his own desire to combine with hers; but consciously she
•may not be aware of it; hence the Egos of the lad give out
the order to win her; they launch into the lad's system those
unsatisfied atomic, youthful or uncombined Egos whose com-
bination with those in the maiden is desired and these pro-
duce in their work among and upon the nerves and ganglia
the amatorial fever called love. The loving youth may,
by his ardor, even arouse the shy maiden to a similar fever.
.Where the affinities and Egos to be satisfied come entirely
from Egos of the body, the love dies or wanes, when they
are satisfied; only a faint pleasurable reminiscence remains;
where the unsatisfied Egos come purely from those of the

Bonl, the body may be unwilling to sacrifice itself for them
and only a "platonic love" may result; but where both Egos
of the youth, those of soul and body, furnish the unsatis-
fied Egos for the love, that love is a holy, sound one; for,
after the bodily Egos are satisfied, the much more vital,
much slower satisfied E^gos of the soul will require a con-
stant friendship to lead to a harmonious union; friendship
is the union of Egos of the soul not by bodily means but
by harmonious brain interchange of impression and impulses;
friendship can be as fervent as love and, if well matched,
is far more permanent. The reason for falling in love with
just a certain maiden and not any other is usually superfi-
cially simple, namely chance of acquaintance; put two un-
attached people of different sex in constant vicinity and
sooner or later they will all fall in love. The deep mean-
ing of love lies in the very atoms of the Egos.

Another element is religion. How does religion enter our
brains? We refer here to chapter on Egos to perhaps find
hints of attempts at suggestions of explanations. The Egos
of the soul may be, as outlined there, an element of even
another planet which found man "fairly good to dwell in."
From this distant home it brings a great mass of past rec-
ords and future possibilities which it tries slowly to im-
part to the dull, sluggish Ego of the body, which is as yet
almost entirely unprepared; the two can even not com-
municate directly; have to use the complicated path of nerves
in the brain and body to get from one to the other; hence
can only communicate by means of impressions through our
senses. All attempts of such intro-Egotical intercourse in
regard to past or future experiences may be classed as re-
ligion. The gods may all be entirely real, only the com-
munication passing through human experiences becomes not
a language of gods but of men. Thus Jehovah may even
represent a something which ruled among some Egos in
a past experience, and may attempt to continue this rule
through his former subject Egos of the soul; Jupiter may be
a past ruler of some Egos of the body, while Brama is and
was a power over still another group; there may be Egos
of bodies and souls who, in the past, fought out freedom
from all rules of divine "despots" and who now attempt to
construct a progressisve world out of laws beyond Jehovah,

Jupiter and Brama; while Jehovah, Jupiter, Allah, etc., may
be, so to speak, planetary rulers, the free Egos of Panthe-
ists, Unitarians, Eationalists, etc., recognize that there are
rulers or ideals or units vastly beyond the planets, much
more comprehensive, and they elaborate paths and develop-
ments towards them. This influence is exercised upon the
whole brain in the shape of religion and morals; religion
is, so to speak, the introduction of specific gods into the phe-
nomena of the outer world and into our impressions, souls;
morals, their introduction into our impulses, our bodies. The
Jehovaliite aims to have Jehovah recognized as producing
the raindrop, the light, the spider and the mountains; the
Bramanite thinks the same in regard to Brama, hence all
their thoughts, if consistent, pass through a ganglion, which
might be termed "Jehovah,^* "Brama," ganglion, etc. From
certain analysis it would seem that this ganglion is quite
deep, beyond the comparative and generalizing ganglia. But
the Pantheist, who as a child was brought up in Jehovahism,
very strict, very sincere, has ousted Jehovah from this
ganglion; he is grateful to him for having made it a good,
serviceable ganglion; but the Pantheist has found Jehovah
too small, too inharmonious, to fill it; he has put Jehovah
among the ganglia of record, with Jupiter, Allah, Wotan,
etc., and has the ganglion "Religion'^ left open to be occupied
by any phase of Pantheos sufficiently large to satisfy it; at
present an entire train of phases occupy it, later on a more
distinctive form will occupy it; the ganglion of morals of
impulses is connected with that of religion, but of complex
connections. When Jehovah left the ganglion of religion
he also withdrew from that of morals as far as his specific
requirements are concerned; the man who does not fast, who
does not sacrifice, is no longer a Jehovahite. Prayer is a
strange phenomenon. The historical philosophy of it, as
elucidated by Herbert Spencer, is the humanified form of
a dog wagging its tail; but even in the Pantheist two words
as prayer remain; they are silent: "Thanks!" "Mercy!"
The devout Christian prayer is a ganglionic exhibit or sacri-
fice offered before the altar in the ganglion of religion to
be accepted by the erstwhile occupant. While the author,
as an extremely devout lad of 16 or 18 years prayed: Our
father, who art in heaven, etc., there passed in his mind —

which is the popular name for brain in action — ^the full ex*
hibit of all the best the ganglia of "Father/^ "Heaven/^
"Thy WiU/^ "Forgive," "Kingdom," "Glory," contained—
all these ganglia were, so to speak, spread open before the —
imaginary or real — occupant of the ganglion "Eeligion;"
there passed a hope through the nerves that as an equivalent
of such a fine exhibit the praying youth would feel the pow-
erful help of Jehovah, that he would be made perfect. He
did not know why Jehovah wanted such an exhibit or what
he could do with it, but evidently it did all those ganglia
good to stretch themselves, display themselves and as the
only result of all prayers a better "tone" was secured. While
the priests of Jehovah are always ready to explain the non^
fulfilment of prayers by: "foolish prayers," "wicked pray-
ers," "unnecessary prayers," why don^t they say so before
receiving the fee for a mass or the request — increasing their
importance — for a public prayer? Prayer of a specific. re-
ligion are not natural, they are educated by long, hard train-
ing into children. Loud prayers are in all cases of all
children up to 14 years, and ninety-nine per cent of^adults
mere phonograph reproductions without intrinsic value, even
o{ positively retardative effect by the hypocrisy nursed by
them. Jehovah, as a real living existence, is the aggregate
of all the living ganglia of religion which he controls; he
will have died or fallen asleep like Jupiter when no more
living ganglia are controlled by him; he has passed his life
zenith within humanity the moment the most advanced,
learned, honest, logical ganglia of religion or, in consequence,
minds, acknowledge that he does not satisfy them and re-
move him from the possession of this deep ganglion to a
mere historic ganglion of record; but Jehovah, if he is not
merely eager to rule, but like us, only in a slightly higher
degree, realizes his shortcomings, withdraws as pleasantly
fi:om those ganglia when he finds his period has come, as
a soldier from an indefensible fortress, Jehovah is under
law and within the Pantheos of All will get his just de-
serts and rewards and punishment like all of us. The author
repeats: He has given Jehovah as fair a trial as possible
and found him not satisfying; others with less courage of
expression may perhaps not venture to express the same
thought, although they may harbor it.

VI.

BRAINS OP GREATER AND LESSER SPEED THAN

OTJRS.

TIME AND SPACE.

Everybody can observe by experiment that it takes con-
siderable time from the moment an outward impression
strikes our senses until we move the hand to ward off or
to draw away or to receive. It takes about one-tenth of a
second for an astronomer to record the passage of a star
across the spider web of the telescope from the moment he
sees the passage until he moves his finger to record it upon
an electrical keyboard; this time, called personal equation,
differs with astronomers from one-fifteenth to one-fourth
of a second; every astronomer in astronomic annals is la-
belled, so to speak, and his personal equation is mentioned
in his observations, so as to allow for it; a good astronomer
is he who always has the same equation. This equation
shows the speed of the human brain and human nerves.
From eye to center of brain around the ganglia is about
seven inches at the most; from the brain to the finger thir-
ty-four inches, a total of forty-one inches, or in very tall
people, four feet; it takes in the average one-tenth of a sec-
ond to travel this space; this gives a velocity of
4-^ 1 — 10, or forty feet per second, or about twenty-eight
miles an hour. In simpler forms of sensation e. g. if one
finger is touched while a person is blindfolded it takes about
one-tenth of a second till the person moves the finger
touched; hence in the nerves the speed is greater, because
in this case eighty inches, of which 68 inches in nerves, have

been traveled in one-tenth of a second, giving about sixty-
seven feet a second; the highest combined brain and nerve
si)eed measured has been one hundred forty feet, pure nerve
speed one hundred eighty feet.

It may be said that ony brain can ])erform the more work,
the more rapid in speed; a piano player has been known to
strike with separate fingers ten notes a second; but, when
figured out his brain nerve speed is not greater than about
a hundred feet. A stenographer keeps about three words
behind a rapid speaker and has a brain and nerve speed
of about one hundred sixty feet a second. In all those cases
the pure brain speed is less than ten feet a second. The
nerves are much more rapid than the brain ganglia. Probably
a stenographer represents the most difficult form of complex
brain speed, much more so than a musician. The author
would from his own intellect conclude an internal pure brain
speed of about seven feet a second to be very near the maxi-
mum. Our brains seem to some of us only to work so rapidly
because we overlook the small distances our thoughts travel;
from eye to Ego in a direct line is only three inches; through
the ganglia of conscious vision at the most seven inches;
it takes one-tenth of a second to perceive something con-
sciously; the lightning we see consciously one-tenth of a sec-
ond after it has passed, an explosion we hear consciously
one-twelfth of a second (less distance) after it happened.
In our motor nerves the highest pure nerve speed is about
one hundred eighty feet a second. Hence thought, different
from popular idea is less fast than a good trotting horse.
Some people say: "Why, I can in an instant travel in my
thought from New York to London, three thousand miles!"
Do you? Do you not travel only from the ganglion "N"ew
York" in your brain, to the ganglion "London" in your
brain, distance four inches, in about "an instant" of at least
one-fiffh of a second? To travel really from New York to

London correctly in our thoughts means to be conscious
of every act, every mile, every meal, every sleep, we would
travel much slower than the steamer which travels thirty-
five feet a second, while our thoughts in our brain travel
only seven feet a second.

Electricity travels 200,000 miles a second or about 1,050,-
000,000 feet; hence if our brains were to think with electrical
speed we could think 1,050,000,000 : 7, or 150,000,000 times
faster without having our thoughts to us, possessed of an
electrical brain, appear one whit faster than now. As the
average life of fifty years is almost exactly 1,500,000,000 sec-
onds, we could with an electrical brain in ten of our seconds
think and sleep and act our whole present life, and it would
appear to us precisely as long as to our present minds —
fifty solar years. Or, in our present life length of fifty solar
years we could do all the thinking for 150,000,000 people,
each living fifty of our years. Of course, these fifty of our
years would appear to us with this electrical brain as 7,500,-
000,000 years would feel to us in our present brains. What
a vision of practical eternity before us! This shows also that
the time we feel is entirely dependent on our brain not the
sun or earth. As an electrical brain would think so much
faster than ours it would probably in the ten present sec-
onds which is its equivalent of our fifty years, not grasp
well one of our present sluggish thoughts. Our quickest
lightning thought of one-tenth of a second would be to an
electrical brain of a felt or apparent duration of half a year!
We coiid not grasp the thought of a man whose slow brain
would require six years to pronounce: How warm it is to-
day! This phrase pronounced in ordinary voice takes one
and one-fifth seconds. How would it appear to an electrical
brain? Using our calendar terms it would be: Jan. 1,
1897,— H; July, 1897,— o; Dec, 1897,— w; July, 1898,— w;
Dec, 1898, \ July, 1899,— a; March, 1899,— a; March,

1900,— r; March, 1901,— m; Oct., 1901, ; Dec, 1901,— i;

July, 1902, — i; Jan., 1903, — day! etc. It would take the
equivalent of six of our years and feel to the electric brain
as long as that. And if that electric man heard that such a
race of beings with such slow brains had imagined they had
by means of "gospel and Jehovah'^ solved the entire prob-
lem of the world, he would laugh that the Polar star would
ring.

Of course, an electric speed brain would also, as compared
with ours, go perhaps 150,000,000 times deeper; have ex-
alted ideas of which we have not even yet names and con-
ception. Hence, by simply supposing an electric brain we
obtain already possibilities of intellects for Gods far be-
yond Jehovah, Brama and Allah and even Pantheos as far
as we can conceive him.

Astronomers have not been able to compute the speed of
gravitation; from many of their deductions they incline to
the view that it is millions of times swifter yet than elec-
tricity. Just imagine a brain moved with the speed of that
force. It would think all the thoughts of all the people on
the globe (one thousand six hundred millions) each living
fifty years in perhaps one second and have plenty of time
left to think those of the beings on all the planets at the
same time.

Might it not be that the terrestrial Pantheos has an elec-
tric brain, while our solar Pantheos has a gravitation brain,
if we use the term brain to indicate the machinery of its in-
tellect? Much more elevated will our brain appear when
we compare it with slower speeds. Thus the period of the
rise and fall of land on our earth is about four in(;hes to
two feet per century; we may call that a geological speed.
This means that our brain speed is about 9,000,000,000 faster
than that speed. Is not the reason of our not understanding
the meaning of the geological changes grounded on that dif-

ference of speed? One of our lives of our fifty years woul^
feel to a geological brain only like a flash of one-sixth pf »
second; 1,000,000 of our years only like about one of our
hours. . ; .

Is not the possibility, nay, even probability suggested thaj
between the very slow geological brain and very rapid .gravi-
tation brain illions of grades of brains may exist eveij. p^
earth, on the planets, the stars? Our brain is merely. Qne of
these brains. They do not communicate with jeach, other
because they cannot tune to each other as yet. This viev
also opens the other one that our "Time" is essentially, a
product or rather an adjustment of pur brains to some syn-
chronous phenomenon in nature. Time as such is nothing
absolute, merely a relative measure somewhat harmonioup
with our brain speed. If we had a geological brain, our day
measure would be worthless, the changes of night and d^y
would appear to us so rapid as to produce an impression Uke
high notes of 100,000 vibrations a second; if living on the
earth with geological brains similar to our present brains
we would not notice night -at all; 100,000 day? and nights
would pass before us in a space of time we would then f^d
just as we feel one second now; as we cannot at all distin-
guish between twenty vibrations of light and dark in one
second now; it would be simply one average light. We
would measure our seconds by what are now our years, our
days by what are now our geological periods, our years by
what are now our eternities.

We have only to suggest such by no means hyperfanciful
possibilities to make us feel modest and yet proud; we occupy
in our perceived world a medium speed intellect, or do we
only think it medium speed because we can conceive of about
similarly fast and slow intellects? The immensely rapid in-
tellect might be called useful to a phase of Pantheos think-
ing and embodying all the illions of molecules, brains,

thoughts of many beings^ the future; the immensely slow in-
tellect suited to a form of Pantheos thinking and embody-
ing cosmic changes extending over to us enormous periods,
but not paying, so to speak, attention to details, the past.
Of course Hhe immensely rapid and immensely slow Pantheos
of intellect may combine in illions of grades and our own
may be the result of such a combination; some immensely
slow intellect may not yet have counted a second since our
world emerged from a cosmic nebula, while some immensely
high speed intellects may live eternities in every one of our
seconds. How would a lazy man on earth like it, as a pun-
ishment, to be gifted after death with an electric intellect
and have to live and think 7,500,000,000 years — ^as it would
feel — ^but no longer than fifty of our present years? Even
that ancient philosopher who said: "To the Lord one thous-
and years are like one day,*^ had reference to an intellect in
speed between ours and a geological intellect.

One strange conclusion presents itself in regard to time.
If the Pantheos of all is a combination of all the illionth
slow and illionth rapid intellects, then the past, present and
future do not exist in him; for, while his most rapid and
therefore most intense intellect pierces and anticipates the
most distant future, at the same time, to his slowest intel-
lect, the immensely distant past is but the present; hence in
Pantheos there is no time; while the immensely rapid in-
tellect grasps all details and the future, the immensely slow
one brings the past into the present. That this is not at all
fanciful may be illustrated by another observation. The
light from our earth travels 320,000 kilometers a second; if
an astronomer with an immense telescope were located on a
star 8,000,000,000,000,000 (eight thousand billions) English
miles (13000 billion kilom.) distant, the light from our
earth at the time of the destruction of Carthage would have
reached him two hundred years ago, he would to-day see the

days of Golgatha, would see the Romans crossing into
Britain fighting with the ancient savages there; our long
ago past, even within our solar system, would be to him the
present; stars have been measured with good logic to be
.820,000,000,000,000 miles distant, others estimated at from
2,000,000,000,000,000 to 10,000,000,000,000,000 English
miles distant; hence even within our stellar system our past
is as yet our present; the picture of the battle of Thermopy-
lae is still travelling within our visible universe; even the
times of Adam and Eve are in light waves travelling far this
side of the nebula in Andromeda; hence within the Pantheos
of our world all history is still a present time. On the
other hand, if an immensely rapid brain would figure and
live our future lives by studying and entering every atom
composing us, it would live in the future, although our
present; the intensely rapid brain anticipates the most dis-
tant future. Even to the astronomer who calculates a solar
eclipse to come in 25,000 A. D. no "future" enters into his
calculation; his mathematical formula, while calculating
time, knows no time; 7, 9, a, x, f are always. The author,
when fourteen years old, calculated the position of Jupiter
for Jan. 1, 1921, as then to him enormously distant time!
Astronomy proves that highly developed intellect penetrates
the future; hence rapid brains anticipate it.

In a manner similar to time is space analyzable, not as
something absolute like an empty box, without sides, bottom
and lid, but as a relative living unit dependent on our brain
speed. The human speed, as it may be called, to differen-
tiate from geological speed, gravitation speed, etc., lies be-
tween narrow limits. An internal brain speed of 7 feet (2.1
meters) per second is probably quite high; running man
covers 100 yards (90 meters) in 9 seconds or a speed of about
33 feet (10 meters) per second; the motion of the arm throw-

ing a stone, at the moment when that stone leaves the hand,
is only about 120 feet (36 meters) a second.*

AH our ideas of space are intimately connected with time;
still to-day in Austria the distance between towns is meas-
ured by "hours," each equal to 4,000 "steps," each equal to
3 "feet." As man put one "foot" in front of the other
5,280 times, he measured a mile; each toe movement bent
and extended gave an inch; the space of one mile consists of
5,280 foot movements; hence, linear space is the sequence
of movements, one beginning where the former ends; flat
space is the movement in all directions over a given surface,
and steric space that all over a certain sum of surface spaces.
The size of our steps depends on the size of our bodies and
their number on the speed of our bodies and their nerves.

Take the distance from eye to Ego (about 4 inches), with
our human nerve-brain speed we travel it in one-twentieth
of a second; if we used the speed of static electricity wie
would travel it in 1 : 2,400,000,000th of a second; we would
even travel a mile in 1 : 200,000th of a second, would even
go around the earth in | of a second; as we now travel in
^ of a second running about 4 feet, the circumference of the
earth would feel to us like 4 feet and we would measure
our earth as a dirt ball 1 1-3 foot in diameter, 4 feet around
and of a surface of about 6f square feet; travelling with
gravitation speed we would use micromillimeters to give the
dimension of our earth; even to the nearest fixed star now
by human speed measured as distant 12,000,000,000,000 (12
billions) miles, we would travel with gravitation speed in
60 seconds, and as we now run in 60 seconds about 500 yards,
we would call that distance 500 yards. If, on the other
hand, our brains used geological speed (4 inches in 100

•Easily calculable for those familiar with algebra; greatest dis-
tance thrown 480 feeti^rlBO meters. The speed of sensations in nerves,
our most rapid figure, is about 180 feet (54 meters). Hence man's body
and soul move within a range of only 180 feet speed per second.

years) we would need 100 years to travel from eye to Ego,
and as we now, in human speed, travel 1,200,000 miles in
100 years, we would call that distance from eye to Ego
1,200,000 miles of 5,280 feet each, and those human 4
inches would then feel to us exactly like 1,200,000 miles
do now. Distances such as a human mile would be then
simply incomprehensible eternities.

As the world contains all kinds of speed, and as in our
nerves we have embodied all of them in a certain manner,
it is evident that impressions on, e. g., our eyes travel in the
most varied, complex manner, some to us instantaneous, some
so slow that we cannot trace them. Our process of aging,
getting old, is nothing but the gradual appearance at our
body nerves of speeds requiring 50 or 100 years to travel
once through our nerves; hence we age by the geological
speed which is of about that rhythm; this rhythm belongs
to the Pantheos of our Earth and in our dying and being
bom we are following in our bodies a purely terrestrial cycle.

All our nerves consist of molecules, the molecules of
atoms, the atoms of "atomatoms,^^ etc.* There is little
doubt that every molecule is a perfect cosmos like ours, every
atom a perfect earth like ours, populated by its suited beings.
Our Egos come from and return to them; within those mole-
cules and atoms we will find the "forces" of our present
existence represented by their molecular forms and speeds.
Many physicists are compelled already to assume "that the
atoms within molecules are separated by enormous distances
as compared with the size of the atoms,"-^a perfect de-
scription of our solar system. Hence we will find within
the molecules the molecular representatives of our earthly
electricity, light, gravitation, geological speeds, etc. The
human egg is about one-hundredth of an inch across; this
little body contains at least 256(22) or 256,000 trillions

•See the author's "Molecula.**

(English notation) of molecules; there are at least 80,000,000
along one diameter; even with human geological speed a
message from one to its antipode would require 91 days, but
with molecular speeds years, centuries, ages.

These molecules of the egg hold within themselves the very
essence of all cells of the human body to be formed; the
human Egos live within that egg in their specific manner;
every new thought is merely the arrival, at our Ego centers
and ganglia, of impulses travelling with such a speed as not
to have been able to arrive sooner. How frequently do we
observe in our brains phenomena like this: We witnessed a
great fire, it impressed us profoundly; the light of that fire
entered our eyes, was transformed into thought; after some
years the memory became dimmer and dimmer. We are
sitting among some friends, talking about the last election.
"By the way, just now a curious thing struck me I never
thought of before. You remember I told you of the great
fire at Boston; when that roof fell in there stood a fireman
at the comer and the embers fell right on him, as I thought,
and I could not see how he survived, but I know he did and
I know now why, he stepped under a stone door-sill and
as the roof fell snuggled close up to that sill and that pro-
tected him.^' "Well, what has that got to do with the
election?" "I don't know, it just came into my mind/*
That impression of the fire 20 years ago was and is still
travelling through the brain; it had travelled into the mole-
cules and among them, had been returned with some molec-
ular speed and had just now again arrived at ganglion "fires"
and from there been thrown into consciousness; perhaps that
fireman has some molecular history connected with our own,
the vague human impression of which just now arrived at the
Egos.

Human fate depends evidently greatly on those retarded,
slowly travelling thoughts between the enormous intra-

molecular distances. This aspect allows even a definition of
the appearance of destiny within the Pantheos of our Egos:
Destiny is the slow appearance at new molecules and gan-
glia, of impulses travelling with the specific speed of a cer-
tain phase of Pantheos. Thus, the geological speed of 1 foot
per century would travel from eye to Ego in 30 years; its
molecular form would require, to travel across the human
egg, many millions of years; hence our impulses from the
Pantheos of our Earth reach us only in very long periods,
our destiny as far as the Pantheos of the Earth, whose speed
is the geological, is involved, is mapped out by ages of slow
consciofying of long ago started impulses. We have shown
elsewhere that love belongs to the electricity group of forces;
this is a force not transmittable through an absolute (?)
vacuum, hence confined to each star, planet, etc.; love —
electricity — ^belongs to rapidly travelling phases; these an-
ticipate the future, hence lovers greatest potentiality lies
in the future of our earth; liberty is motion, a motion be-
longing to the group gravitation, extending beyond all calcu-
lable distances, its time rhythm is enormously high, hence
futures; therefore it has a future beyond all stars, while love
is specific to every planet and star.

Thus the Jehovah rhythm of life from perhaps 3000 B. C.
to 5000 A. D. or 8,000 years, if measured by the human unit
of 50 years, is 160 times slower; a day is half a year in
Jehovah, all slower rhythms bring the past into the present,
but do not anticipate the future; hence Jehovah in his spe-
cific humane existence is a phase of Pantheos of the Past and
only as he attaches himself to Love, Liberty, Justice will
he be vital in futures. Justice requires at least two forces,
hence is more complex, exalted than any single force; it is
entirely independent of time and space elements in the ab-
stract, but as varied as the phenomena of action and back
action in the concrete; some forms of back action travelling

with geological molecular speeds arrive continuously within
humanity as delayed justice (rewarding or punishing) started
many thousands of years ago (we now call them, e. g., luck).
Under Justice we have treated further aspects of this group
of ^^speculations/^

CHAPTEE VII.
THE EGO.

Two great questions are given to us as intellectual prob*
lems: What is the world? What am I? If in the solution
of these two intellectual problems we omit a single step,
the solution will not be accepted. Even in common human
affairs an explanation has to be gradual, step by step. Let
us suppose we desired to explain the simple human mathe-
matical equation: 23y2dx=y^+Const. While w€ may say it
means the summation of very small changes of x along a
curve of the form 3y^, this really explains nothing to an
average person. To explain this equation would involve a
course in mathematics of about four years' duration with the
probability of the intellect of the average person giving out
in two years, perhaps, at cubic equations; the true explana-
tion of ^3y^dx=y^ is already beyond the intellectual
capacity or educatability — ^not only beyond the positive edu-
cation—of 1,499,000,000 out of the 1,500,000,000,000 people
on our globe. Hence, in explaining anything popularly, the
greatest care is required to not exceed the average present
stage of knowledge and the average capacity for enlarging
the intellectual horizon. Many branches of science have
gone way beyond average capacity; thus electricity, astron-
omy, mathematics, biology, physiology, mechanics in their
advanced development are far beyond the average not only of
knowledge but of actual intellectual capacity. What does

capacity in this sense mean? It means the highest educata-
bility possible, the highest development of our intellects
with all possible aids of inoney, time, ingenuity. It may be
said logically that, if you or I were to begin- to-day to learn
how to play the piano, if we hired the finest teachers, gave
daily sixteen hours to practice, etc., we would simply find
that in about two years we would have reached a stage be-
yond which we could not go at all; this stage will be far
short of Liszt, Paderewsky, Chopin, etc. The same with
painting, mathematics, etc. How many people play billiards
daily for years without ever getting beyond low mediocrity!
There is a sharp difference between teachability (or readi-
ness to be taught) and educatability (or capability of assim-
ilating the things taught). Thus, the answer to the two
grand world problems consists of illions of steps, each one a
little steeper and higher than the foregoing; we have begun
to ascend the great stairs some millions of years ago; some of
lis, like babies, cry at the very first step; some get tired or
dizzy looking upward and remain sitting on that first or
second step; others go as high as the fourth or fifth, while
few of us have yet conquered the first dozen. But, we have
great difficulty in climbing singly the steps; hence, to skip
one is entirely beyond us. We see nothing else before us,
we must climb or grovel in the dust. Some priests with per-
suasive powers lull the multitude at the foot or first step into
a sleep; they sell them some narcotic called "revealed re-
ligion;" the users fall into a dream, they think they have
climbed the entire range and in their exalted intoxication
shout Allah, Jehovah! There will be some headaches when
the drug has worn off its effect. We have not only to climb,
our arts have even to build the steps for us. What is the
world? To solve the problem we have to define what
^Vorld" means. Modern science is busy in this definition.
Our explanation and answer to the query can only progress

as we learn to know what "world" means. But the pure
scientist is only the man who gathers the hricks; another
set, the scientific philosophers, must put those hricks together
into steps and thus be enabled to go a little higher; another
set may use the steps built by scientific philosophers and,
from this new standpoint, view the progress made. Such re-
views we usually term explanations, theories, if referring to
the past; hypothesis, if to the future, — although the term
hypothesis is frequently used for very dim vistas of present
and past to be proved or disproved. The second question
which ought to be first from personal standpoints is: What
am I? But*it would seem that the solution of: What is the
.world? would involve the I or Ego; hence it is the second.
Pantheism is a step in the explanation of the world.

What am I? While it may not be possible to advance far
to-day, we may analyze first the I or Ego under a Pantheistic
view, that is to say, a logical view free from creeds, Gods,
"revelation" or "authority."

I am to-day John Doe. What is John Doe? Is it my
hand, my foot, my eyes, my tongue? Answer: No. Is it
my body? Answer: I don^t think so. Is it my brain?
Answer: Possibly. Is it my consciousness? Answer: Yes.
The answers show different classes of people and different
aspects. Some hold the body, some the brain, some the con-
sciousness to be the true Ego. These views represent really
deep differences in the actual constitution of those intellects
holding those views. To still go further: Is my soul the
Ego? Answer: I do not know. With the last question we
introduced a new element "soul." Is there such a thing
as a soul? If we mean a gaseous man, a man within the
man, logic would be against the supposition, but if we mean
by soul the aggregate of our thoughts, logic would find many
phenomena easier to explain, if we were to use the term
soul for aggregate of our thoughts, emotions, reminiscences.

hopes concentrated in a specific form of consciousness. In
this sense "soul" will be used here. Hence soul is not the
pantheic phase of the material brain; it is the Pantheistic
phase of the aggregate of thoughts, of the product of the
brain; as these thoughts are linked to outside phenomena
our soul is attached to outside phenomena by exceedingly fine
strands of first impressions on our senses. Our soul may
therefore be said to have been manufactured by many widely
scattered points centered in our brain. The Ego of our
soul is its dynamic center, a correct expression but diflScult
to grasp. If we take a cannon ball, its center of gravity is
the center of the ball; this center remains the same whether
the ball is fired or at rest; nay, it even remains in exactly
the same spot as a so-called dynamic center when the can-
non ball explodes. If all the energy of all the little pieces
into which the cannon ball bursts is calculated in exact
mathematical terms, and their dynamic center (center of
action) be figured, it will be found to still be in the same
center of gravity. There may not be a single piece at that
precise spot, but it is the center of action nevertheless.
Hence, in the center of action of our soul is the Ego of the
soul. But our thoughts have been detached from the ob-
jects and become elements of our brains; hence our soul is
composed of those thought points in our brains and the
dynamic center of consciousness becomes its Ego. Every-
body can imagine even three distinctive Egos in his make-
up; the Ego of his thoughts, ideals, hopes, ambition — ^his
soul; the Ego of his body its strength, sentiments, ailments,
pleasures, and finally his Ego as John Doe, Tom Brown,
Jane Clark, etc., members of a family, a race, a nation. In
which form do we live most? All we know is that to-day
three distinctive Egos appear, one as John Doe, one as the
soul of John Doe — Doe — and one as the body of John Doe —
John. John Doe's body appears first; even before he is

named^ before it is known whether he will be John or
Jane Doe, his body appears; from the first that body shows
a certain perfection— confer suckling process— entirely want-
ing in his soul and his individuality as John Doe; hence his
body belongs to the oldest phase of Pantheos; it is part of
the PantKeos of the animal world; next he is christened
John, but don't know it; long before he knows that he is
John Doe he yells, sees, hears, talks and shows his soul;
much later he evinces consciousness of being John Doe and
not Jack Clark. Hence the Ego of his body — John — ^is
lower in scale because older than that of his soul — ^Doe, —
and that of his soul lower than that of John Doe as a mem-
ber of a nation. Hence, his soul is a phase of Pantheos be-
tween individual and nation; is it a phase of the Pantheos of
family, the intermediate? Take away the memory of our
young days, do we feel our Ego of the soul complete? Take
away our family impressions, is our Ego of the soul com-
plete? We cannot assert it. The Egos of our souls and our
Ego as John Doe or Jane Clark are often confounded; in
very many they are even not clear. It will be f oimd that it
is the Ego of the soul which is usually thus obscured in un-
clear intellects. In the Ego of the soul we carry the im-
pulses of founding a family not for sexual reasons alone;
we carry the impulse of improving our intellect; we have a
vague suspicion that this Ego is more permanent than that
of the body and also that our existence as John Doe may be
more permanent yet, but more remote. The Ego is the
greatest puzzle right within us, far more vital than almost
anything outside; even Gods are only appealed to to pro-
tect our Egos. A pure center of gravity or of dynamics in
our present view is not conscious; hence we have to suppose
logically at this dynamic center a something making it con-
scious. This is the Ego. What is it? A microbe? If we
suppose a microbe, we have gained nothing, because a mi-

crobe is so large that it has again organs, even a brain,
within its brain a center, and we simply get another Ego.
A logical explanation must introduce a new element not
merely the same element enlarged or reduced. Hence it
would seem logical that at the dynamic center of our gan-
glia, nerves or brains a something is located, smaller even
than our "microbes,'' of properties which at present we
cannot even clearly describe. A complex molecule of cer-
tain elements would answer to a certain extent, because we
know nothing whatever about molecules forbidding this view.
While this complex molecule may be even in possession of a
microbe in the center of our intellect, it is at present the
most remote something we can even suggest.* At
present the molecule is also our most indestructible
unit. Take even iron, the molecule of which is one
of the most complex and one of which it is almost
proven that it exists in a broken up condition in our sun,
our chemists, with all the heat of the electrical furnace, the
most powerful acids, complex manipulations, etc., have not
succeeded to even give a hint of a possibility of its break-
ing up within the limits of our earth. Similarly with
iodine; while it shows a splitting up of molecules into atoms
at about 3,000° C. (5,400° F.), it still remains iodine; evap-
orating and boiling gold at 4,000° C. does not change it as
gold, only in form. Hence, if our Egos are of a molecule — or
atom — ^nature, they are indestructible to our terrestrial conr
ception because all our agents are too coarse to destroy atoms.
As we have illustrated in "Brains," a geological brain would
not notice our days and nights because too rapid for it; thus
a molecule may be correspondingly too small for heat waves.
Heat waves are about 0.0008 millimeters (0.8 micromilli-
meters) (l-32100th of an English inch) long; atoms of metals
somewhat less than one billion times smaller; other atoms

•See the Author's "Molecula."

very much, millions of times, larger than those of metals.
Hence, the length of heat waves is to the size of the mole-
cules as thirty-three thousand years are to one second. At
present waves thirty-three thousand years apart do not im-
press our intellect as such; we might recognize one occur-
rence, but would think it an isolated fact; but, with a geo-
logical intellect might conceive them as sound or as breath-
ing. Hence, if our Ego is of a metal-atom character it is
beyond destruction by heat, but not beyond combination;
our present Ego of John Doe is built up of many molecular
groups received from ages back.. When we recall that there
are 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of copper in a
pin-head of a brass pin, we will see that even if for 1,000,000
generations we had received one new molecule from each fa-
ther and mother, the combined molecule of our Egos would
be only 3,000,000 individual ones and not larger than
1-100,000,000,000,000,000 of an inch; hence still enormously
beyond our best microscope.

If we die, the Ego will merely notice the extinguish-
ment of some stars; it will simply be night at the
Ego; its stars are the center of action of each gan-
glion; its suns those nearest. It has become night at
Ego-land. As its connection with the stars is destroyed by
decay (microbes), this will not change its night, it simply
remains a night, illuminated only by intramolecular means.
But the molecule of the Ego finally finds itself in a putrid
mass, it realizes this fact pnly in that it is still night; it en-
ters the body of a microbe, connects with the microbe's Ego,
obtains faint glimmers of distant stars (microbic thoughts);
the microbe passes into the soil, is eaten by larger ones, the
Ego passes along, it reaches grass roots; the Ego in the course
of natural laws ascends the plant, enters the flower, the
pollen; it receives again outside light; only dimly is there an
impression in the Ego, that it once saw a much finer heaven

" — a liuman brain — ages ago; it may be only two years, but
the rate of Ego sensations may be and is different from our
present one. The flower is visted by a bee, the bee collects
the honey, a young maiden eats the honey; the Ego is still in
the honey, an immensely small molecule. The resident
Egos in the body of the maiden meet that wandering Ego
passing by in the blood current; there are "affinities," at-
tractions between all molecules; it is held, enters and sees
another starry heaven of a human brain, but the Ego of the
brain of that maiden receives a call from the body for Egos
to be stored in her ovary. It sends the latest arrival Ego
into one ovum; of course not alone, but with hundreds or
millions of others. This ovum becomes the start of a new
human being by combining with Egos of a different element,
but of similar general nature into a man. Their combina-
tion is a new human Ego in a newly combined brain. Poi-
sons and all effects of chemicals are explainable coarsely by
the supposition of an Ego of molecular conditions. Within
the Ego all the impressions, memories, thoughts are stored
like events of actual occurrence. To consider this impos-
sible would be to deny the experiment on page 144. Hence,
when our Ego leaves our body it leaves it with all our impres-
sions from the first day of infancy to the last breath unalter-
ably fixed; no matter that (as John Doe) we have forgotten
some things; the Ego has it all stored up. Even if the body
is cremated our Egos are not affected; in the ashes, with
every molecule of iron from the blood, with the calcium
from the bones, etc., will be found every molecule of Ego;
the cremation will appear to the Ego only like a storm at
nighttime, or an earthquake to us, but, when the ashes are
thrown into the ocean (one case in Xew York) or into a gar-
den, or put into an urn, the Ego will re^^ume its normal
molecular condition. A Pantheist "believer" in this view

would not seal his body in lead or mummify it, but ratber
desire it to return to "dirt'" as rapidly as possible.

The Ego of the body is of a different nature from that of
the soul. The Ego of the soul may be a platinumlike mole-
cule; that of the body an iodinelike compound molecule;
either of them may be from either parent; if the combina-
tion be of a constitution

I
I

I — Pt — I it may be a woman; if Pt a man.
I 1

I Pt— t— Pt

1
Pt

A man may furnish the Ego I and woman the Ego Pt
compound or the reverse. The Ego of the soul may be
called Psychium; that of the body Somine, and that of Jane
Doe Psychium somide or of John Doe Somiumpsychide, and
their Ego formulae be Ps^SOy or SoaPSy, in which Ps and
So are already complex molecules. As soon as such a view
is logically proven we begin to get a foundation for the first
term in the Human Equation. The Pluman Equation is
the full answer to: What am I? See chapter 27.

We have among the elements of Didymium, Samarium,
Terbium, Ytterbium, etc., groups such a flood of most curi-
ous molecular phenomena that, e. g., some excellent chem-
ists have been forced to conclude that we can actually split
up and recombine certain Ytterbium elements. They are all
of very high atomic weights, that is to say, very large mole-
cules. Are some of the following good unquestioned obser-
vations about certain elements any less marvelous than soul
and brain phenomena? Didymium in colorless solution ab-
sorbs certain parts of the sunlight, leaving dark patches in
the spectrum. Uranium can absorb electricity without gain-
ing weight or without our being able to get it away again;

electricity, especially of the Roentgen ray variety, just
plainly disappears in Uranium. Silver salts absorb certain
rays of light entirely and store them up as energy or static
light. Sulphide of Calcium can store up light and return it
again slowly. Crystals of Cyanide of Manganese are dark
purple, but their solution in water is water white. A large
mass of yellow Iodide of Mercury crystals touched in one
point becomes rapidly scarlet red, etc., without end.

Our anxiety for the welfare of our soul, body and even
our self, as John Doe, becomes the molecular desire for
proper suitable combinations. Even chemists have to rec-
ognize to-day that desire; they have no better word for it
than "affinity.^^ If we mix thousands of different chemicals
in a vessel, after five minutes they have arranged themselves,
each atom has picked out the ones with which it can com-
bine ("desire" satisfied); after a week they have shifted a
little to make more "comfortable'* combinations; after
months the first combinations have again combined among
themselves, etc., but there will always be left some not quite
"satisfied,** and this is the reason why we can recombine
them; without those unsatisfied affinities no chemistry would
exist. Hence, it is logical to infer that the Egos of man
owe their unions to similar molecular desires of combina-
tion or affinities. When we have once brought chemical
affinity into an intelligible precise form we have developed
the second term of the Human Equation.

The simpler the molecules the less likely they are to break
up. The Ego of our body is relatively simple, but of great
tendency of combination (as in the albumen qompounds),
that of our soul may be still simpler and much less inclined
to combinations; that of our existence as John Doe is more
complex and easiest disturbed. Every ganglioi} has in its
center a small molecule of this element of limited conscious-
ness united by the strange nerve apparatus with the central

Ego; the Ego of aoul becomes thus the entire ensemble of
isolated but united elements — call them Psychium — com-
bined with the central mass. While the supply at the cen-
tral mass of Psychium holds out new cells and ganglia and
organs grow continuously, supplied from it, we are growing;
when a maximum has been reached they are gradually with-
drawn; later on again pushed out, again withdrawn, etc., un-
til the oscillations, so to speak, grow fewer and fewer and
the person grows duller and duller till death comes," which is
a reconcentration of all scattered molecules of Psychium.
We have all observed cases where the "mind" was all gone,
but the body continued in vigorous health and the reverse.
In the first case the molecular reconcentration of the Psy-
chium elements has taken place while those of Somine (the
body Ego elements) are still scattered; the person John Doe
thus affected remains John Doe; he has his rights, the law
protects him. In the second very common case a vigorous
"mind" resides in a wretched body; it may be even that the
Psychium in this case has to supply energy which normally
the Somine supplies. In case of the combination itself hav-
ing withdrawn, death of John Smith and temporary death of
his body and soul has occurred. We can even imagine fur-
ther that our brain-nerves be essentially Somine Psychide
and our body-nerves Psychium-somide. In chemistry there
is great difference between such terms. Thus sugar and
vinegar (acetic acid) have chemically an identical atomic
composition,, but the arrangement of the atoms is very dif-
ferent. A chemist can have a combination of Carbonhy-

, dride.with Hydrogen carbide. Hence, at death the atoms
(Of Psychium no longer held in proper position by a proper
ijerve arrangement, may draw together to leave the body
.48 one unit; the Somine may do the same, but the latter is

.. Hiore combinable; hence will rapidly enter into other bodies.
The Somine John carries with it the purely bodily impres-

sions and some lesser ones from its association in John Doe
with Psychium Doe. Only when in futurity the Somine
John finds again the former Psychium Doe under proper
conditions will there be the same John Doe. The idea
would seem fertile of possibilities and suggestions of explana-
tions. As one of them, it might be supposed that some fu-
ture chemist in about 500,000,000,000 A. D., who had spe-
cialized himself in the study of Psychium- and Somine, who
had received from Anthropastronomer Henry Doe a calcula-
tion of an ancestor John Doe, whom the astronomer thought
interesting to see, may discover and isolate the Psychium Doe
in a certain rock into which the ashes combined; the Somine
John he has isolated before; he places them into his Psycho- •
somic incubator and, lo and behold, out steps John Doe.
"Where am I? How long did I sleep? Do you think it will
be as warm to-day as it was yesterday? Who won yester-
day^s ball game? Where is Jane Clark?" John Doe will
think he was only asleep a short time. Only when he re-
ceives the explanation will he marvel; he will find himself
terribly out of time and will say: "Let me sleep again till the
turn of all my people comes to arise." Some billions of
years from now, perhaps on another planet, which contains
then the elements of the bursted, consumed, sun-devoured
earth and extinct sun, a similar evolution will occur and
John Doe will arise in the family of Does, will progress,
learn more than he first did, will be better prepared for the
next arrival, until in many illions of years he is Jiimself the
Anthropastronomer while that anthropastronomer still sleeps
an illion age sleep of voluntary calculated rest in an enor-
mously higher, as yet unspeakable, phase of Pantheos, or is
still engaged no longer in the Human Equation, or even the
equation of Jehovah, or even Brama, but has under work
equations which contain already elements of the Pantheos
of All, John Doe may remember his resurrection of 500,

000,000 A. D. only as a very vague dream. Every night we
die for 36,000 seconds, every life we sleep for three myriad-
iums.

Science is not only pushing towards the Human Equation;
it is also pushing towards creative Allmight; towards the Past
this Allmight appears as Perfect Analysis or History; to-
wards the future as Perfect Synthesis or Art. The Human
Equation and World's Equation are the highest aim of
our souls, the highest aim of pure science. Our bodies are
more interested in applied sciences or "arts;" hence the high-
est development of "arts" in this sense is the perfection of
our bodies to make them longer and longer lived, health-
ier, stronger and more powerful, while our combined exist-
ence as an individual demands the highest development of
both combined, science and arts, to produce a family, state
or nation in which we will enjoy the greatest contentment
or happiness. This necessitates the best use of our earth,
best laws, best manners, best forms of mutual intercourse;
hence, while science in its ultimate highest grade enables us
to satisfy our soul, highest art will satisfy our body, highest
justice will give us a life of absolute contentment; as jus-
tice is only a form of just sentiment, justice will be the high-
est sentiment. We have again the Buddhist trinity, Bramah
justice, Vishnu the soul, Shiva the body. In Christianity
we have no real trinity. The entire trinity of the Jehovah
creed neglects the body and, to make up, so to speak, the
Virgin Mary is taken into it as a power almost equal to
Jesus (compare the Catholic Virgin Mary cult). In our Pan-
theistic views we have the Trinity Science — the soul; Art —
the body; Justice and Law, two united into one, — ^the human
being. But in Pantheos, aside from this trinity, we have
an illionity of other phases. This trinity is at present only
marked in the Pantheos of Human Development.

We can under this aspect also give a vague definition of

the Pantheos of all souls. It is the aggregate of all the
molecules of Psychium scattered over our earth; may be also
in the moon, sun and stars, just as the Pantheos of gold
includes all its molecules. Eeligion does not seem essential,
it is merely a transient mental control. This might sup-
port the suggestion made before that some Gods of the
Jehovah type are denizens or Egos* of other planets, — confer
the odd legend of a star appearing at the birth of Jesus, —
not so vastly superior to us. Might not that star — ^if it hap-
pened — ^have brought some strange, not terrestrial elements,
or Egos? The contempt of Jesus for the body is only nat-
ural if his Ego from another planet or comet did not appre-
ciate the body manufactured by the earth.

This entire speculation about the Ego seems very ab-
struse, but we are convinced that many a reader may derive
great intellectual profit by enlarging in his own sphere upon
the suggestions here made. Have you anything better to
offer?

The suggestions lead to one other fertile thought,
namely: If our Egos are something of the nature of a spe-
cific molecule then our supply of souls must be limited.
However much gold there may be on our earth, it is a
limited amount expressible in tons; it is approximately three
hundred million dollars' worth per cubic mile on the surface,
or twenty-six thousand millions of dollars worth in the en-
tire earth for every single inhabitant; a very large amount,
but hardly enough for the stupid greed of average people.
Hence, if the suppositions Psychium and Somine are still
rarer, there may be, as of Germanium, Gallium, Norium, only
a few ounces in the entire earth. After the supply has once
combined there is the end at present. Did the Saurians
die out because they used up the supply of their specific Ego

•As there exists no sensible, clear-cut rule, only practices, about
plurals of nouns ending- in o, we use the plural Egos as more con-
sistent with the general rule; the pronunciation of Egoes and Egos
would be alike anyway.

elements? Does this mean that there is only a supply for
ten thousand million or one hundred thousand million of
people, and that the race must die when that is used up?
For, the Psychium of a dead person may not be able to supply
the Psychium of a newly born infant; the first may be sat-
isfied in its combination with Somine, the second as yet
unsatisfied. The soul of a dying person may no longer be
the pure Psychium before conception; it may be a Somium-
psychide, while the body is a Psychium-somide, and that
John Doe was a combination of Psychium-somide with So-
mium-psychide.

The suggesting of a name for an element before it is dis-
covered is to chemists nothing new. In 1870 Prof. Mende-
lyeff, of St. Petersburg, figured that there ought to be an
element in properties between Gallium and Silicium; he
called it B. In 1885 Prof. Schroeder, of Breslau, discov-
ered an element he called Germanium and it was found to
be the one anticipated by Mendelyeff and called B.

But as we are afraid to weary the non-chemical reader with
further chemical analogies, we will illustrate more popular
aspects of the Egos.

The Path of John Doe in the world from the infinite
Past to the infinite Future may be likened to that of a planet
or comet; his conscious appearance as John Doe consists
the crossing of the path of his Psychium and Somium at the
same time on the line of Destiny, Man, thus:

This scheme of diagraming by curves, extremely common
in mathematics, gives a large number of most beautiful

reflections. The straight line may be the line of "destiny,"
'^fate" or "law" of being alive as a man. Whenever -either
the Ego of the Soul or Body of John Doe crosses it, either
becomes alive; where both "John" and "Doe" meet, outside
of the line of life as a human being on Earth, they are some
conscious being; if they meet below the life line, of inferior
grade, if above the life line of superior grade; a violent cata-
clysm on Earth affects the Somine but hardly at all the
Psychium. The detail study of the curves suggested may
furnish to our readers in their special cases some interesting
thoughts.

After death our Egos become latent, as far as John Doe,
his soul and his body are concerned, but not necessarily for
the survivors. Why do we not remember about our former
Egos? Because only as Somium-psychide is our Ego cap-
able of recording impressions. Silver as an element is not
sensitive to light, also Chlorine only slightly, but the com-
pound Silver Choride is intensely sensitive and may store
for ages light impressions received to-day. After dea^h we
may wander vaguely consciously as the Somium-psychide
through its interesting travels, may follow the Psy-
chium-somide in its re-entrance in other bodies, may even,
if the knowledge acquired helps us and we desire it, bring
about a more rapid reunion as John Doe, or may be con-
sciously and supremely happy within the Ego of an Empress
of Bussia.

Even the Empress of Russia has to eat food; with her
food there may enter her system the Ego of an ancient
serf, which, under the stimulus of sex, develops into a baby
girl, however much all the prayers of a great nation and
all the medical skill of a century may be called to aid to give
a male heir to the Russian throne.

The Ego or group of Egos in an infant brings from the
past entirely new impulses; it brings along the impressions

of its past history. Can we explain the birth of a brilliant
artist from ignorant poor shei)heids by direct inheritance?
There is not enough artistic skill in the entire family for
centuries to equip that brilliant artist, but if his Ego brought
along from unknown past the impulses of parents of more
artistic talents, the very surroundings of a poverty of other
intellectual impulses may have allowed that artistic talent to
grow to unusual proportions. Why is so frequently the son
of a great father a mediocrity? In the first place, nowhere
are wrong, unjust observations more flagrant than in com-
paring son and father; the "greatness" of the father may be
entirely imaginary or rather a local one, while the greatness
of the son, he being merely of a less showy type, is not appre-
ciated. But real cases (Goethe, Napoleon, Caesar) seem to
show that all their greatness could not give their children
historically anciently great Egos. They gave to them such
Egos as they received and, while the impulse from the par-
ents was powerful, it could not overcome the weakness of the
life-giving Egos. It is probably not exaggerated to say
that the entire makeup of the child depends for sixty per
cent on his own Egos, for twenty per cent on that of the par-
ents, five per cent on grandparents, etc. How often do we
find light-haired children in a family of all dark hairs, even
to grandparents and further. In a tribe of the Atlas now
swarthy, believed to be descendants of the Teutonic Van-
dals (300 A. D. to 600 A. D.), frequently light-haired chil-
dren appear. Are those influences of Egos of bodies of war-
riors, now one thousand three hundred years dead, still go-
ing through the bodies of the "Shire'* tribes? Even the
resemblance of the children to parents or grandparents is
frequently so slight as to be hardly noticeable. Would we
notice in such cases greater resemblance to an ancient bar-
barian if we could trace the Egos of the body?

In attempting to view phenomena through the micro-

scope of Ego theory let us not stumble apparent contradic-
tions. Thus, if parents have children on a desert island
where nobody ever died except ancient Indians now for-
gotten, would they incorporate those Egos? Most assuredlyj
but these, being weak ones compared with Caucasians,
might only give children that died young or children much
resembling the real nearest parents because the foreign Ego
impulse was too weak. We must also not lose sight that the
supply of Egos may be as great as that, e. g., of molecules of
iridium. Since eight thousand years ago about two hundred
and fifty thousand million people have died. Are those still
first supplies of Psychium, Somine or Somine-psychide or
Psychium-somide ?

VIII.
PANTHEOS AND PANTHEISM.

While the saying of Goethe is true for well established
thoughts: "What one thinks clearly one can express
clearly,^^ new thoughts and forms of thoughts require new
words. The English language is especially gifted; it may
take Greek word roots, clothe them in French dress and
spelling and ascribe some conventional meaning to a thus
formed new word; German, Sanskrit, even Arabic have,
however, more facilities for the formation of readily under-
stood new words out of their own vocabulary.

What is the radical diiferenee between all "revealed" re-
ligions and Pantheism? Eevealed religion attempts the so-
lution of the problem of the world; its existence and God, of
the human equation, by a series of guesses, of logically not
connected hypotheses. Pantheism by slow logical steady
approach from a fairly well established basis of easily prov-
able facts, if possible such as can be reproduced at any time.
"One soldier can capture Gibraltar if Providence is not
against him'' is a well known saying. These problems re-
semble a Gibraltar. What is inside? The Christian says:
Jehovah, Christ, Hell, Heaven; the Buddhist: Brahma, Vish-

nu and Shiva; the Mahommetan: Allah and the Houris; the
Pantheist says: "While they are talking and guessing we
Pantheists keep on digging; we will dig for ages; when one
falls dead new young ones take up the pick; the work pro-
gresses, from chemistry, physics, astronomy, electrology, bi-
ology and botany the sappers push forward. As we pro-
gress and break into chamber after chamber we begin to get
a better and better idea of what is to come. The Christians
scrape the surface; they find a cave filled by some old miner
in those problems with his fancies of Jehovah, the man with
the candlesticks in his mouth, the earthen beast, and imme-
diately they throw down their picks and shout: "We have
pierced to the center, lo and behold its wonders/^ The
Pantheist looks into their cave, sees those coarse idols, the
Jehovah full of savagery, and says: "Yours is only a shal-
low cave; to pierce to the center you have to go through
entire humanity; not merely follow the thin narrow vein
of the small Jewish race, full of falsehood, selfish dross and
gangue. The center cannot be so near the surface that any
"tenderfoot'^ can get to it with only nominal efforts. Dig,
my friends, dig, and you will smile some thousands of years
from now at the idea of your ancestors having mistaken a
geode of pyrites for the mother lode of gold.^' Modern
science is nothing but the slow but sure and irresistible
progress towards the solution of the problem; it is digging,
burrowing, testing and assaying, classifying and figuring, all
tending towards the great solution of the great problems:
What is the world? What am I?

Occasionally some of the head miners in this mine of sci-
ence, like Darwin, Huxley, Haeckel, Spencer, give a sum-
mary and report of progress thus far attained, of results
gained; they tell to the spectators, curious and idlers what
is being done; most of the latter have seen for a small ad-
mission fee the surface caves of Christianity, Jehovahism and
other "revealed" religions and in their eagerness are ready
to stone the miners. They shout: "Why go any further?
Eight there in that cave is all there is.^^ In their impatience
at the slow progress they go into the cave of Christianity and
see there so much tinsel that they get bewildered and con-
found drow^siness with contentment and progress. Occa-
sionally a mighty blast in the mine of science brings forth

a great vein leading right to the center, like Darwin's the-
ory of evolution; for a while the miners rest, assay and work
the vein until they find it is only a vein and not yet the
mother lode; and onward they toil, some following the new
vein, others opening new ones.*

The essential creed of these scientific miners is Pantheism.
The Greek words pan — ^all everything, and theos — God, in
their combination give a fair expression. Pantheism means
ALL IS GOD, not, God is in everything; no, it means:
EVEEYTHING IS SOME FORM OF GOD. It may be put
forth as a tentative hypothesis that in the beginning of our
present order of things the Pantheos of All, enormous, in-
comprehensible as a unit, to us in our present strength, un-
pronounceable by a true word, split up into illions of illionth
divisions, illions varieties of forms, phases, speeds, energies;
our present world arises from the illionth small division of
Pantheos gradually evolving and developing toward the il-
lionth times largest unit. We use the term illion to indicate
enormously large but not "infinite" figures, figures as large as
each individual intellect can logically imagine. Eternity is
an empty word, we do not grasp one thousand years; only the
Pantheos of AH knows Eternity, because it is Eternity.
While thus evolving from the smallest unit upward, the
union of peculiar phases and waves of Pantheos produces our
present times; within those times the union of different va-
rieties and phases of Pantheos produces our souls, bodies and
individualities, our nations, religions, morals, planets, suns
and stellar systems. Varieties of Pantheos in a traceable
form become "phases" of Pantheos. We can only recognize
phases of Pantheos not too far from our own.

Every thought, deed and object is one point in the end-
less line of that specific Pantheos. The Pantheos of a spe-
cific variety is composed of all the points of manifestations
during its career. Every phase of Pantheos now recogniz-
able dimly by us is an aggregate of illions of component
phases, of which we can only discern a very limited amount.
To express those component parts of the Pantheos of All no
good word in the present language conveys an accurate idea;
a stream of Pantheos composed of drops is too material, a

•This miningr simile Illustrates our analytical work, while the steps-
simile on a previous pagre illustrates synthesis.

beam of Panthos composed of rays, the latter composed of
individual waves, not quite material enough. Thus the Pan-
theos of humanity, beginning before the first amceba was
born, was then like a small stream. Embracing in its poten-
tiality all our present conditions, it received the influx of
streams of Pantheos from the Pantheos of saurians, lemurs,
apes; it received the mighty floods of the Pantheos of lan-
guage, of religion, of political ideals, of the brotherhood of
mankind, and is to-day hardly recognizable as the slow
slimy amoeba of some million years ago; it rushes on to
some goal, some ocean, to unite with; every single human be-
ing is a drop in that stream; those drops will remain, even,
after the ocean has been reached; but, while some of them
may then be evaporated again, fall as rain on the earth, reach
other rivers; some may sink to the depth, combine with min-
erals and be locked up for ages, until some form of the
Pantheos of heat sets them free again; thus a certain re-
ligion is a ray of that particular Pantheos of thought, an
ethereal storm consisting of thoughts, fancies, ideas playing
around the common stream; they rush towards the next
phase of Pantheos; these thoughts in their ensemble con-
stitute a new phase of Pantheos, the Pantheos of Jehovah, of
Allah, etc. Thus each individual man consists of illions of
individual phases of Pantheos which at a given time within
the Pantheos of humanity form that peculiar unit Man.

In the beginning there was Pantheos, now Pantheos is,
Pantheos will be, Pantheos was, is and will be everything.
Everything was a phase of Past Pantheos, is a phase of
Pantheos, will be a phase of Future Pantheos; Pantheos lives
only in its development. The phases of Pantheos assume
illions of systems, illions of groups, illions of aspects, of sen-
sations and individuals. Pantheos in the past split up into
illions of phases, is redividing and imiting at present, will
reunite in the illionth future; the lowest subdivision of
Pantheos is as far from our present grasp as the highest
union of phases. Groups and principles of phases of Pan-
theos pass through and are everything under the names of
Gods, "spirits,^' "tendencies. '^ We can only recognize such
groups that do not transcend our mechanism of thought.

To convey an intelligent impression of his own thoughts
"upon the minds of others, the writer has to use pictures and

comparisons, utilizing well known phenomena, but these are
always very inconi})lete, only viewing one or a few aspects;
at the same time tliey serve better than mere words. Thus
the Pantheos of Human Development, or quantity within
mankind, one of the best marked we can observe, may be
likened to the Alississippi Eiver; even death and the mi-
gration of beings is expressed in some parallel; a drop of
water (one human being) falling from a cloud in Montana
travels down the hillside into a brook (tribe), from there
into a creek (clan), into a stream (nation); after long travel
(the life of a human being), during which it sees many
cities and many other drops, it enters the Gulf of Mexico
(humanity). The torrid sun evaporates the drop (death);
as water vapor it goes into the atmosphere, is
blown Xorth and South, East and West (long period after
death), or it may go straight up again to Montana with the
wind, fall again as rain and again reach the gulf (resurrec-
tion).* Our sun evaporates once in about three thousand
years every drop of exposed water on the globe; of course,
some drops have been evaporated hundreds, millions of
times, some may have escaped; but as an average in one
hundred thousand years one individual drop may have been
in a cloud or as steam in our atmosphere about thirty-three
times; may have experienced, so to speak, thirty-three rein-
carnations as water drops.

But some water drops are locked up in the Polar Re-
gions as ice; they have to wait the cycle of ice ages (about
twelve thousand years), ere they are freed. What a period
of rest! Hence this parallel, while very incomplete, which
might be carried much further in detail, illustrates the idea
of the possibility of reappearance after death; the innumer-
able ditferent chances. This also shows why the comparison
of Pantheos of Humanity with a wave is not good; we need
that wave simile to show the undulations and storms on the
stream of the Pantheos of Humanity. Thus the Pantheos
of Passions and Emotions is comparable to a storm, while the
Pantheos of History is the waves on the stream of the
Pantheos of Humanity produced by the storm of Emotions.
We must not compare mass with motion, substances with

•Average evaporation is 48 inches of water per annum (4 ft.); av-
erage depth of aU water over the entire globe, 12,000 feet; hence In
300O years one average evaporation.

100

weight or with force. Thus the waves of light hold within
their very nature an element of force; light can therefore
only be compared to a form of Pantheos of rapid delicate
force, like the very I'antheos of Light itself; we only know
the Pantheos of Electricity (static) or Heat as of similar
nature; all our human emotions, impulses are far more slug-
gish, coarse, material. All force is some matter in motion.

The sciences of Physics and Mechanics proclaim in the
form of axioms a certain number of Pantheistic logica, such
as:

The atom is indestructible within the Pantheos of our
Earth.

The molecule may be broken up into atoms.

No energy in whatever form is ever created new or lost;
it is merely changed.

No sensation is ever lost, merely changed.

Action always produces a back action of its kind and ex-
actly equal to it; thus no virtue without an exactly equal
amount of vice, no darkness without an exact equivalent of
light, no pleasure without the exactly equal amount of pain,
no idea without a back action of an idea opposing it.

Force of any kind is always the transmutation of some
previous force, hence man does not create the least amount
of any force; he merely utilizes ancient and present forces;
heat is a form of force.

No effect without cause determining and Compelling the
effect.

Even light is a form of energy which is never lost, merely
changed, e. g., in our eyes.

At present the tendency of the forces on earth is towards
diversifying, becoming more complex.

Hence, when viewed pantheistically, there appears to every
phase of Pantheos a back action or opposite phase; the
equilibrium between them is their center of meeting. Thus,
we have

101

Center of meeting as
applied to our plan-
Action. Back Action. etary system only.
Pantheos of Motion. Pantheos of Rest. The entire system.
Pantheos of Attrac- Pantheos of Repul- Outside of a planet
tion. sion. (see Jules Verne a

la lune) point of no
weiirht.
Pantheos of Heat. Pantheos of Cold. About 10,000 degrees C.

we live in the Pan-
theos of Cold.
Pantheos of Future. Pantheos of the Past. Our present times.
Pantheos of Liberty. Pantheos of Slavery. Our harmonious revo-
lution about the
sun.
Pantheos of Infinitely Pantheos of Infinitely Pantheos of measur-

Small. large. able size.

Pantheos of Love. Pantheos of Hatred. Indifference.

Pantheos of Action. Pantheos of Back-ac- Justice, equilibrium.

tion.
Pantheos of Destiny. Pantheos of History. Present activity.
Pantheos of Cause. Pantheos of Effect. Law of nature.

Now all these forms of deep, extensive phases of Pantheos
may again combine with each other in various degrees; some
of those mentioned may be already combinations. Thus the
"history of liberty" is the combination of the Pantheos of
Liberty, the Pantheos of the Past and of Humanity.

Mathematics, the start of the Human Equation, is the
translation of those general forms of Pantheism and the
principle of Justice into signs and symbols intelligible to
students, regardless of nationality; hence mathematics do
transcend not only nations, religions, morals and even hu-
manity, they even extend their ideas into the entire universe.
Some time ago communication with the planet Mars was
suggested, and as a start the building of a mathematical
figure, properly illuminated, was thought to be the only pos-
sible code; of course the project was nonsense; we have
enough to do on Earth without meddling with Mars; the
triangle would have to be one thousand miles each side to
be visible from Mars, supposing they had as fine telescopes
as we have. But Mars is bevond our Zone of Life; we live be-
tween —40° C. and + G0° C.(— 40° F. and + 140° F.);Mars
is extremely cold; its snow is frozen nitro2;en, its temperature
is certainly below —180° C. (—300° F.), honce its beings
are beyond our zone, iittorly inapprochable to each other;
our chief element is water; Martians may require silico flu-
oride; the fluorine compounds certainly somewhere in the
universe give a most startling species of beings; they fur-
nish two zones of life, one of —180° C. to 0° C.(— 320° F.

102

to + 32° F.) and the other 800° to 1500° C. (1500° to
2700° F.)

Only one grand series of traceable units, building up larger
and larger ones, is at present clearly mapped out; it inHu-
ences all outr actions: the PANTHEOS OF SIZE:

Within the Pantheos of Size or Quantity we obtain, viewed along
.the line of man, the following steps or phases or grades:

Pantheos of

Our brain

Science and

Forces of na-

Size.

as it developed

scientific art

ture residing

within the va-

occupying

specifically in
the group.

rious groups

itself with the

up and through

group.

mankind.

The Pantheos

? ?

Pantheism.

of the Infinite-

ly Small.

many unknown

? ?

Atomictic the-

gravitation.

units.

ories.

? ?

AtomatomH.

? ?

Inorganic chem-

light.

istry.

heat.

Atoms.

Chemical affin-

Organic chem-

electricity.

ity. ^

istry.

Molecules.

growth.

Minerals.

Earthy salts,
rocks.

Mineralogy.

cohesion.

Nerve matter.

Chemo-physics.

adhesion.

protoplasm.

Synthetic chem-
istry.

Physiology.

motion.

amoeba.

one ganglion.

Bacteriological

individualism.

chemistry.

nutrition.

cells.

several ganglia
united.

Cellulogy.

life.

Ancestors of

The brain.

Paleontology.

Man.

Biology, zool-

•

ogy.

Anatomy, geol-

thought.

ogy.

Individual man.

The human

Physiology,

Conscious exist-

brain.

ihedicine.

ence.

Two human be-

The ganglion of

Moralogy,

language.

ings (friends.

Justice — gan-

ethics.

enemies).

glion of reli-
gion.

Man and wom-

The ganglion of

Literature, Mo-

love.

an (family).

morals.

ralogy, Poetry.

Several families

The ganglion of

Genealogy,

co-operation.

(tribe).

mutual help
(unselfishness).

clannishness.

Several tribes

Ganglion of

Newspapers,

Partisanlsm.

or interests

public interest

Politics.

(party).

(co-operation).

Several political

(xanglion of Pa-

History.

Patriotism.

interests (na

triotism.

tion).

Several nations

Ganglion of Po-

e. g. History of

e. g. "Pan Ger-

united by lan-

litical sym-

Anglo-Saxons.

manism."

guage (people).

pathy).

103

Several people
united by an>
•cient lAnguaLge,
orisrin (race).

Several races
(humanity).

Man and beast
(animals).

Animals and
plants (living
beings).

Living beings
and minerals
(our present
Earth).

Our Earth and
moon (our ter-
restrial sys-
tem).

Elarth, moon,
planets and
Sun (our solar
system).

All Suns within

our system

(the milky

way).
Several milky
ways (our Kos-

mos).

Several Kosmos

( ? ?)

? ?
innumerable
gradations.

The Pantheos
of the Infinite-
ly large.

The Pantheos of
all.

Ganglion of
"civilization."

Ganglion of hu-
man fratern-
ity.

Ganglion of
"humane" im-
pulses.

Ganglion of ag-
ricultural de-
velopments (?)

? ? ? (enter-
prise).

(The effect of
the starry
Kosmos on our
eyes is prob-
ably the first
origin of the
Ganglion of re-
ligion which
began thus
very early.)

History of Eu- Caucasianism.
rope.

History.

Evolution theo-
ory, soology.

Zoology, bot-
any, agricul-
ture.

Mineralogy,
mining, roads,
tunnel build-
ing, irrigation,
navigation, etc.

astronomy, op-
tical instru-
ments.

s];>ectroscopy,

optical Instru-
ments.

Brotherhood of

mankind.
Anti-slavery.

"Humane so-
ciety."

Trades and
conunerce.
Arts.

Religion.
Sublimity.

Parsee religion.

Ganglia of Sub- Kosmology, op-
tical instru-
ments.

limity.
?

?
?

Ganglia of Pan-
theism.

everybody to
know every-
thing.

The human
equation.

Pantheism.

Harmonious
Perfection.

The Pantheos of The Pantheos of The Pantheos of
all. All. All.

The line of the phase of Pantheos of Quantity can within
itself again combine; thus atoms combining with man (ar-
senic) are the phase of poisons, drugs, etc.; atoms combining
with nation and justice (gold, silver, copper as money) give
finance; amoebae combined with man give diseases (microbes),
even man can combine with our mountains, the result is
tunnels, canals, roads, etc. Thus the various groups up to
our Earth may be very properly said to constitute the Pan-
theos of our Earth. When our Earth ceases to revolve, has
fallen into the sun, the result for ages will be the combina-

tion of our Earth with the Pantheos of Rest. We cannot
name it.

The Pantheos of Slavery and Liberty are very kindred to
attraction and centrifugal repulsion; are they the same
Pdntheos only appUed to different aspects of the respective
phase of Quantity Pantheos?

The Pantheos of Justice seems to the author the highest
definable short of that of Harmonious Perfection, because
no Harmony seems possible that has not passed through
Justice, while Justice seems not to include either Harmony
or Perfection; hence both seem to be higher; even the
Pantheos of Law is below Harmony and Perfection to our
present conception, because Liberty is frequently antago-
nistic to Law, but not to Harmony and Perfection.

In our Mind, we find again innumerable phases of Pan-
theos. Every thought and act is one breath in the life of
numerous phases; the phases consist of nothing else but the
*iggregate of those breaths or acts in all minds and beings.

Whether all these phases come from the Eternity of the
Past, from one single phase is to us in our present intellect
utterly immaterial; we know from our own existence that,
e. g., illions of phases properly combining, give only one re-
sultant, — ^myself, the individual; we will progress more, if
we do not attempt the solution of problems too far beyond
us, while problems many times nearer are awaiting a solu-
tion. The scholar who, the first day of algebra, expects to
solve X® — 5x^H~3x+l=20 will progress less than he who
spends the time wasted by the first in dreaming and fretting
over the unattainable, in plodding through a+b=b+a, etc.

One curious observation seems, however, to present itself,
namely, that into every act at present there enter phases of
the Pantheos of the Past and of the Pantheon of the Future,
which, together, give the present; almost uniformly we call
an act with predominance of phases of the Past an unjust,
untrue, "wicked" act, while one with predominance of phases
of the Future is called just, true, "good." Man came from
lower organisms, is built up of cells (amoebae), serum (proto-
plasm), molecules, atoms, etc.; hence he was those things
before he was man; hence tliey belong in reference to man
to Pantheos of the Past. Man builds up families, tribes,
parties, nations, races, etc.; hence these are after man as an

105

individual began to exist; hence all the phases of Pantteos
before man of to-day are phases of the Past; those after man
of to-day are phases of the Future. All phases seem to be in-
fluenced by the phase of domination whose effect is either
slavery or liberty. If modern man, a member of a nation,
does an act not for the best of the nation but of himself,
he is under the dominion of the phase "selfishness/' a phase
of the past or of lesser development as compared with patri-
otism; hence, his act is called "bad,'' blameworthy. On the
other hand, if one man advocates a war because of "revenge
for a ship" (the Maine), another says "all men are brothers,
brothers ought to follow the rule of Confutsay;" the second
must be judged more near right than the first, because he
defends the larger unit (humanity as a whole) against the
interests or passions of a single nation. A still higher posi-
tion is taken by the man who says: "It seems reasonable to
suppose that in all stars there are people higher developed
than we are, whom we may approach only by the most har-
monious development of everything; revenge is not man's
mission; it belongs to phases beyond the Pantheos even of
Justice; may belong to beings in such stars; but Harmony
and Justice require the most critical investigation as to
who is to blame for the loss of the ship, and if we cannot
settle it absolutely, Justice demands that the case be dropped
for a time, but that its memory be kept until we are more
competent to judge, even if this be one million years from
now. Justice will take care of the guilty, if there be; we
are not yet "Justice."

All phases of Pantheos seem to have a desire, tendency,
attraction, or what we may call it, of ruling, domineering,
preponderating, partly even of becoming conscious. Hence
the element of consciousness must be a phase itself or be-
long to a phase, essential to every phase of Pantheos in its
onward move. E\en the Egos do not explain consciousness;
if anything has to be called the divine spark, it is conscious-
ness, but man does not share it alone, the meanest, lowest
amoeba has in its own dim way a consciousness or feeling of
existence; the family has almost developed already a family
consciousness; the love of husband and wife for the children
is part of it. Whatever it may be, our languages lack as
yet vocabularies to express fairly clear ideas about it, evi-

106

dently chemistry has to supply a word for "afiRnity^* which
serves to explain consciousness. Is it the dim appearance
of a phase of Pantheos of an individual beyond man or of a
new phase just now beginning to dawn? It is one of the
most puzzling problems. But, whatever it be, all phases of
Pantheos within man seem to have a natural tendency either
to domineer or to desire to be free and independent. We
see this fatal dominion in cancer; a cancer consists of noth-
ing but normal cells formed in quantities apparently beyond
control; cancer is the cell dominion of the body and as a
dominion of a lower over a higher unit "bad,'' destructive.

If one form of Pantheos enslaves another one the result
is never perfection. Only in Harmonious Perfection lies the
ideal. What is this ideal, e. g., of our Brain? Evidently
a brain which without undue effort (harmony) absorbs and
digests all (perfection) impressions, which has a gravitations
speed for details and a cosmic speed for general phenomena,
which is at once deep and comprehensive beyond our present
fancies, which however (harmony) is not a monstrosity, but
a thing of charm, beauty, lovablcness, pleasure and justice.
Man in Harmonious Perfection has reached a stage where
every death is merely the rest betweea two heart beats.

Against the enslavement by any phase of Pantheos all
other phases fight; they call it "the fight for liberty.'' Thus
the bachelor who sees in family life as practiced under cer-
tain state laws of the United States only an undisguised
slavery fights for his liberty when he allows his "heart to
break" rather than to marry his beloved one. He is not
opposed to the family idea at all, his martyrdom is merely
against a slavery which is against all tenets of Harmonious
Perfection, which, to be harmonious, must be voluntary,
that is to say, merely brought about by harmonious impulses
within the individual mind of the bachelor. Whatever his
ideal of family may be, he fights as a passive hero against
that which tries to force upon him that form which is not
his ideal. Thus the Pan-dermanists of 1848 fought for a
liberty, namely, a government by the people of All-Ger-
many against the then existing petty monarchies and des-
poties. The Southerners in 18G4' fought for a "liberty" from
the dominion of a dominant party in the North, although
this was only part of the causes of their fight; others were

107

in the services of phases of Pantheos of the Past (negro
slavery, bigotry, religious and moral intolerance); hence of
a character not deserving the sympathies of Pantheists, but
the principle of leaving as well as entering a Union does
seem to be a just one. The Christians who died for Jesus
between 100 and 350 A. D. died for what became an ideal in
1792: liberty of religion, although as they put it it was for
a slavery within Jehovah or Jesus, but the Arabs, Orange-
men, Waldenses, Arians, etc., whom the Catholics killed,
also died for the same liberty of religion, but the ideal: lib-
erty of religion was then too far distant to be recognized as
such; it was merely a war of one slavery against another

slavery,

* * «

The Trinity idea as invented by the priests about 100 to
300 A. D. and refined to-day; for, the Bible contains not one
word of it, itself shows also strikingly the idea of Panthe-
ism. The Father, Jehovah, is the oldest lowest form of the
phase of Pantheos called "God;" the Son, by contact with
Buddhism, (?) is already much more refined, idealized, but
the Holy Ghost is beyond both of them. Just think of that
curious expression that Jehovah may forgive sins against
himself; the Son does the same, but neither can forgive sins
against the Holy Ghost. Does not that show the grading
of Pantheos? The Holy Ghost — not as in the Bible, but as
in fancies — gives knowledge, the speaking of foreign
tongues; he is a Pantheic phase quite congenial to Pantheists,
much more so than Jehovah and Jesus. Curiously enough
the old testament contains nothing whatever, even no for-
gery, about the Holy Ghost, only vague questionable traces
of Jesus. The Daimon of Plato is not Jehovah or Jesus,
but very much nearer to the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost
is also the least personal of the three persons; the Christian
church did and does apparently not know really what to do
with it; it is a fifth wheel on their wagon of creed; but it is
the only higher phase which links harmoniously Jehovah
and Pantheos. Much more pantheistic is the trinity idea
in Brahmamism. There, Brahma is the highest Pantheos, al-
most Harmonious Perfection, higher than Vishnu, the Hin-
doo Holy Ghost, and Shiva, the Earth. All these trinity

108

ideas are merely forms of expressing the Pantheistic logi-
con: Every phase of Pantheos is a part of higher and is
composed of lower phases. Through the Holy Ghost the
Jehovah Trinity attaches itself to Brahma and to Pantheos.
Evidently those ignorant fishermen in Emperor Augustus'
time vastly preferred some superficial tricks (miracles), and
did not grasp the import of the Holy Ghost; they did not
realize that this is the only deep saving element of their
religion. Even the Roman Catholic church does not really
know what to do with the Holy Ghost; it cannot clearly de-
fine what that ^^unpardonable sin'^ against the Holy Ghost
is. Trinity to the Pantheist is a true view, only Pantheism
is an illionity of which the Trinity is only a small part,
and the Holy Ghost, just because of its undefinableness, is
the very highest phase within the Jehovah Trinity. Brahma
is more the Pantheos of Harmony, Perfection, even Con-
tentment, while the Holy Ghost is the Pantheos of science,
of knowledge, of art, of progress. Even Christianity in its
idea of Trinity recognizes four graded higher phases like
Pantheos; the Father representing the Ego of the Body —
he "begets'^ a Son; the Son, the Ego of the Soul, he de-
spises the body, the earth, the flesh, emphasizes the soul;
the Holy Ghost, a principle beyond both, representing an ele-
ment even foreign to the ancient Jews, namely: science, but
all three are one God, a truly Buddhistic expression. The
trinitarian view really creates a fourth God here; "all three
Gods are one God,^' namely, the "God" of the groups repre-
sented is higher than each atom, corresponding to about the
Pantheos of Humanity. Brahma incloses a still higher form
because the principle of the Devil is also included in Brahma
in some harmony, but Brahma neglects the Pantheos of the
Sun, the world; hence is not Perfection. Pantheos of Har-
monious Perfection includes all of these Gods, is, therefore,
a higher unit than any of them. We cannot imagine har-
mony without our Sun and the Stars; hence Pantheos in-
cludes also the extremely rational, deep, sensible Parsee re-
ligion.

Do we gain anything by acce])ting Pantheism instead of,
e. g., !Mahommetanism? !Most decidedly. What is our
greatest attainable aim? Is it wealth? Not at all. Health,
wisdom, fame, pleasure, long life? None of them by itself.

109

Only one true full aim can be expressed by one idea, al-
though two words, all others have to be modified and ex-
plained, and that aim is: Conscious Contentment. The
wealthy, healthy, wise, famous and those favored by song,
women and wine, all have, in individual instances, committed
suicide because "tired of life." Have we a record of any
truly contented man who committed suicide because tired of
contentment? Not outside of insane asvlums. To have
contentment we must follow Frederic the Great's advice:
"Love all things but love none of them too much." If we
love a thing too much we become its slave; no contentment
in slavery. This means harmony, the right, proper har-
mony between all things. A contented man is a harmoni-
ous man. The more harmonious the nearer to the highest
phase recognizable to Pantheists, namely: the Pantheos of
Harmonious Perfection. A contented person has attained
part of it, although he may be deficient in perfection. The
Christian who loves Christ, of whom he has only a vaguest
hearsay knowledge, who, as he calls it, "follows Christ,"
who certainly was a woman hater, pauper, beggar, shiftless,
despiser of the flesh, can never be contented. Daily doubts
and grave perplexities arise. If even the saints sin nine
times a day, how can an average Christian who sins ninety
times a day feel contentment when he considers that
every sin offends Jehovah and Christ, and has to be atoned
for? How can he be contented, while chained to the de-
spised, wicked, thoroughly damnable body? Even the Ma-
hommetan can find contentment only because his intellect
slumbers; but is that a contentment worthy the highest stage
of mankind? A truly contented person must feel that he
has developed all his faculties to a harmonious maximum,
that he has held his body in the best possible health; he
even at times enjoys a moderate pain because it gives him
a keener relish of pleasure; he harbors within his intellect
harmonious ideas; no perplexities between Jehovah and Sa-
tan, Brama and Vishnu harass his thoughts. He recog-
nizes "All is for the best," a truly Pantheic saying. A truly
contented person must not have the regrets: "I wish I had
learned that, done that, etc." Unpleasant memories are
some of the greatest enemies of contentment, but if those
memories are there, he finds that while he suffered, he was

110

doing more in Pantheos than when he was happy; he finds
a key to solve the puzzles of the misery in mankind, the
povei-ty, the pain and despair in a manner at least suf-
ficiently satisfactory for his intellect and contentment. Je-
hovah himself cannot be more than contented. The con-
tented man rises to the level of the personal Gods, while
travelling the straightest possible road to the Pantheos of
Harmonious Perfection, which emotional people might call
Pantheos of Contentment. When the contented person, is
on the death bed, the habit of contentment will also extend
to death, and it will come as easily and painlessly as sleep.
Pantheism, by acknowledging all things as God's, allows to
all a harmonious development and, as a consequence, con-
tentment. The "philosopher" in daily life is a pantheist.

Pantheism as a collection of ideas as a "religion,'^ ac-
cepted as logical by people in full possession of normal
human powers, senses and brains, is as much a phase of
Pantheos as Jehovahism, Bramaism (not Bramanism), Allah-
ism. The ideas we harbor about a certain conception of a
God are specific and all the individuals subscribing to them
form, so to speak, in that part of their brain in which the
ideas specifically reside, the drops of which the stream of
their God consists. Thus Jehovah consists, materially
speaking, of all the intellects which he controlled, controls
and will control; their aggregate, — ^but not one more! — ^is
Jehovah. Thus Pantheism as a speculation, a doctrine, lives
only in and by the intellects it controls, only as it embraces
more principles than Jehovahism, recognizes and accepts
vastly grander aggregates of phenomena, is it to that extent
greater and more powerful and nearer the great truth? Es-
pecially that form of Jehovahism called Christianity despises
the Earth and "the flesh;'' lives only for a strange dream of a
future hypothesis, knows nothing of sciences, of astronomy,
of mathematics, of evolution. It is a collection of few rela-
tively narrow ideas. The world to Christians is a poor work
of Jehovah spoiled by a snake, to us Pantheists it is our
mother, father, ancestors past and future. The aim of Pan-
theism is to bring phases of Pantheos now totally uncon-
scious in a to us harmonious conscious existence. The world
viewed by Pantheism is absolutely perfect; the imperfections
appearing before us are only temporary, due to' our inferior

Ill

intellect or to blending of phases of Pantheos not harmoni-
ous for our own purposes and not harmonious for the time
being, but they all work towards harmony in a higher place;
the imperfections are only due to our standpoint; they would
not appear to us as such from a higher, more enlightened
standpoint. Thus the burglar, while annoying to the indi-
vidual, has developed within the nation the many inventions
of locks; indirectly he gives employment to thousands. If
there was no "vice of prostitution" there would not exist
the "virtue of sexual purity;" the vice is vice only for the
time being; in the evolution and development of man, vice
has as honorable a place as virtue. Until we have reached
the highest perfection, we will always need some form of
vice to develop virtue; even weak virtue is a form of weak
vice. The virtue of five thousand years ago is the vice of
to-day, and frequently the reverse. To produce the human
race, according to Jewish tradition, a son of Adam must
have married his sister; to-day that would be one of the worst
"crimes" imaginable; the good daughters of Lot married
their father four thousand years ago, without exciting the
wrath of Jehovah, who was so very sensitive on trifles which
are now ridiculous to us — anointing the toe of a priest, etc.
Even in Greece, Socrates had to die because he preached
a harmless philosophy differently from the rest. The Anar-
chists of Chicago were "criminals" to-day, eighteen hundred
years ago they might have been called apostles. On the
other hand, the "virtue of fasting" of only five hundred years
ago ie considered to-day already as an evidence of an un-
balanced mind. The "vice" of making images of God (see
ten commandments) became a virtue long before Raphael.
Stealing was no "vice" in Sparta, only "getting caught"
was. Even the killing of another man is sometimes a crime,
sometimes a good deed. Men are exalted for doing it in
war, executed for doing it for private gain. Pantheism at-
tempts to take a most comprehensive thoroughly logical view
of all phenomena within our grasp without despising the
least of them, as Buddhism and Christianity do most
markedly. A good Pantheist should have passed through
at least one of the revealed religions to fully give them just
credit. A Pantheist is not only absolutely tolerant, he
even enjoins everybody to accept some system of explana-

118

tioa of the phenomena of the world; and much rather to
accept any revealed religion than to live and die in a blank
state of mind. We derive some good from all religions
and it i« very easy to leave their dross by the way.

A beautiful mathematical jiiotiire of the develoitment of
phases of Pantheos is represented in Synthetic Geometry;
this belongs to higher Mathematics and develops out of
bundles of rays all the figures, laws and propositions of
geometry which we know. If we suppose a bundle of flat
rays like a fan to issue from a point A and another fanlike

bundle from another point B, if the rays are in proper posi-
tion they will at intersection form points where two "anal-
ogous" rays from each bundle come together, and, if all
these points of meeting are joined, the joining line will
form a perfect ellipse or circle or straight line or spiral ac-
cording to the laws of these analogous rays. Who would
prima facie suppose that two fanlike bundles of perfectly
straight lines could by their union form a circle? Yet the
laws of this mathematical wonder are perfectly well known;
nay, if the rays be bodily and more in shape of a bunch
their union will describe the outline of any body, even the
human body; and only two bundles of perfectly straight
rays are needed to do it. There are three interesting points
in these rays: their two points of origin and their area of
meeting. The infinity beyond the point of origin and be-
yond the point of meeting is of no further interest just now;
thus the analogy may be deduced that out of apparently in-
congruous and mo,st dissimilar bundles of rays of Pantheie

lis

waves as resultant, a most unexpected product may issue.
When we once know the law of the rays that of the product
is known. These geometrical fans of straight line rays are
extremely simple. What a multiplicity of results is possible
if the rays are active wave motions! If we can construct
out of two or three or four fanlike bundles of straight lines
the entire geometry, what can Pantheos construct out of il-
lions of rays of pantheic phases. The world is truly infinite
in possibilities. It may be truly said that synthetic geom-
etry is the first a+b in the "Human Equation,^* see XXVII.
No finer illustration of a phase of Pantheos. It is the
Pantheos of Development expressed in mathematics. The
intersections as in the illustration form not only an ellipse,
but numerous other points and curves, thereby illustrating
the complexity of every phase of Pantheos.

Every astronomer is asked by visitors to the observatory:
"Do you think the stars are populated by other people?"
Unfortunately he can only answer the question as the
teacher of mathematics answered that of a pupil who, at the
beginning of a course in Differential Calculus, asked him:
"What is that Differential Calculus?" He said: "It is a
year's course, and if at the end of a year you still have to
ask, you better drop mathematics." The question of inhab-
itants on stars is so difficult and complex that it can only
be answered qualifiedly: "If you mean people like us, no
planet within our solar system could support them, but every
fixed star has planets and there some of them enjoy climatic
conditions very similar to our earth and are probably popu-
lated by inhabitants, although entirely dissimilar to us.
We may say every star, planet and comet is populated in a
specific manner never duplicated anywhere else. Thus an
inhabitant of the sun may have his frame consisting of Ti-
tanium, his blood of Molybdenium-carbon compounds; he
feels chilly at 10,000° C. (17968° F.), warm at 11000° C,
etc.; an inhabitant of Mercury is comfortable at 500° C.
(940° F.), warm at 550° C. (1000° F.); one of Venus thinks
it a severe winter to show 40° C. (100° F.); on our Earth
we are comfortable with a winter of 0° C. (32° F.); on Mars
a warm summer is — 160° C. ( — 300° F.); on Vesta, Juno,
Bellona, etc., warm winters are those of — 250° C. ( — 480°
F.), cold ones of —270° C. (—520° F.); on Jupiter the

114

planet is surrounded by steam and still some 1000° C. (1800°
F.) warm; on Saturn the rings are exceedingly cold, — 170°
C. (—320° F.), but the planet is warm, about 400° C.
(750° F.); on Uranus the planet is warm 60° to 100° C.
(140° to 212° F.); on Neptune we approach for warmth very
much our Earth, but our Sun, alas, is so far away that it
shines only like a star no larger than a hen's egg when to us
our Sun appears as large as a sunflower. Hence, on no planet
can we live as man. We know too little of the fixed stars to
pick out their planets, but we may say almost conclusively
that on none will the conditions of our Earth be duplicated.
But the beings living on other stars are as much realities as
we are; we cannot understand the thinking processes of solar
beings within their 10000° C, nor of Sirius beings within
their 50000° C, nor of beings in universes of —10000° C.
(below zero), but it remains a reasonable hypothesis that we
might understand beings living on planets of temperatures
between —100° C. and +100°C. To all revealed religions
man on Earth is all and everything; the stars are only cheap
fireworks gotten up by the Gods to amuse those terrestrial
"wonders of intellect;'^ even God's only begotten Son has to
waste full thirty-three solar years to "save'' us, while mil-
lions of other stars and planets are without his services. Is
Jesus travelliiig about the stars atoning? Truly a God's lot
would not be an easy one.

Just in this point Pantheism is the first religious ideal
which stretches its hands of thought out to a glad greeting
of Pantheists of a Sirial Earth; it even dimly connects with
all beings by recognizing the Pantheos of Cosmos as one of
the highest phases of which man must become a conscious
member to reach the Pantheos of Harmonious Perfection.
There is little doubt that millions of kinds of beings, actually
living, are higher, higher and higher in development than
we; others lower and lower until some stars harbor denizens
close to Harmonious Perfection, while others are just form-
ing their specific amoebae. Christianity is the exaltation
of the selfishness of the human race, which asks in its his-
torical-fancies for the death of God's only begotten Son,
to save it, while Pantheism acknowledges the proper posi-
tion of the Human Eace and in its creed includes all beings

115

on all stars as essential to the ultimate "salvation'' of a single
man.

No other line phases of Pantheos is as traceable in the
order of sub- or co-ordination as that of the Pantheos of
Development; even within each of these phases certain lines
of Pantheos are clearly outlined. We have only to mention
the words Law, Fate, Destiny, Circumstances, etc., to sug-
gest a new line not as yet well recognizable or definable.

Thus the "laws of chemistry" are evidences of a harsh
unyielding Pantheos; Destiny, as well shown by the story of
Jupiter casting the die as to whether Hector was to live or
to die, and finding that "Destiny" decreed he should die,
turning sorrowfully away is even above Jupiter. Above
Jehovah are Law and Fate, above Brama only the cosmic
Pantheos. Destiny is quite different from Fate; it is the
idea of a vague though real aim towards which Fate drives us
by inexorable Laws and Circumstances. Now in all those
capitalized words are phases of Pantheos almost completely
beyond our ken; they are only aids, however, to the Pan-
theos of Harmonious Perfection and not self purposes, at
least as far as we can now see; perhaps that of Destiny is
beyond Harmonious Perfection. It is within the "Pantheos
of Ethics" that we are at present absorbing the Law of
Morals; this is the first series of Laws which does not appear
man-made; for, morals only make nation, tribe and human-
ity possible, while religion is more of an individual concern,
and all truly religious laws, of course yet more in political
laws in religious directions, are palpably man and perhaps
"personal God"-made^ but not within the very molecules.

A few words about certain "fads." Astrology is the
baby's play with astronomy applied to the Human Equation;
a mixture of wake-dreams, fairy stories and astronomy, yet
the spirit in it is the same which taught us to predict solar
eclipses, it is a nice occupation for intellectual babies, even
praiseworthy if not practiced on the plan of our established
religions (private gain for priests, enslavement of intellects).
It is intrinsically almost as yet utterly worthless; there is
not ten percent of truly progressive element in it; ninety
per cent are phases of Past Pantheos. Sptritism, still less
attractive, only a very faint trace of trying to work out the
Human Equation, is rank with gross deception, sordid mo-

IIG

tives, tricks of "revealed'^ reKgions, tardly one-tenth per
cent phases of Future-Pautheos, over ninety-nine per cent
Past-Pantlieos. Theosopliism may be said to be a bastard
goblin of Buddhism and Spiritism; the very foundation
(Mme. Blavatsky) is so utterly unworthy of credence, of
competency, of even common trustworthiness, the entire
system such a mass of muddled unproved verbiage that it
can only be classed as a freak mongrel of Spiritbramism;
the truths in Brama by a wild union with untruthful Spirit-
ism are obscured into an almost irrecognizable mongrel; cer-
tainly not five per cent of Future Pantheos hidden in fifty
per cent of the Pantheos of empty A^erbiage and concealed
beneath forty-five per cent of Past Pantheos. Mesmerism
and Hypnotism are the scientification of "Bluff;" also of
the power of pure impulses free from logic; as they repre-
sent an enslavement they are essentially a Pantheos of the
Past, group Slavery, only mixed with traces of Pantheos
of Science and progressive phases, too much deception and
sordidity. Animal Magnetism — a misunderstanding of cor-
rect truths by mediocre intellects, a childish idea, most cu-
riously twisted, of the true observation of Du Bois Eeymond,
that electric currents are active in the body, although more
as incidentals than as vitals; of not enough value to occupy
valuable time. Telepathy, — an entirely unproved fancy as
yet. No good proof of the fad exists; those quoted occurred
mostly among folks not noted for clean-cut observation and
freedom from bias; the author, in spite of numerous ex-
periments, found not a trace. Take the often-quoted exam-
ple: A person e. g. in a church — if the preacher is dull, it
is an excellent opportunity — "fixes his mind" on a person.
It is said this person soon gets uneasy and finally will turn
around. To decide the question, the author observed at first
how many people in a given group turn. around anyway,
without "fixing the mind" on them; he found among sixty
people within range in a church that, in course of one hour,
without visible cause of disturbance, or otherwise, there oc-
curred ninety turnings of the head, or an average of one and
one-half per person. On another Sunday he "operated"
on that group, and, alas, only two turned around while his
"mind was fixed," eight turned around later, and four re-
fused. He gave each person, for three minutes, his concen-

117

trated "mind/^ Hence, the effect was not any better than
if he had not fixed his mind; for, while he had his mind on
certain ones, others of no interest to him kept turning around
as on a former Sunday, and on this Sunday he observed in all
among forty-two people seventy instances of turning
the head; hence, about the same proportion as formerly, and
among the fourteen experimented on only two apparent suc-
cesses and four failures, hence a percentage of sixty-seven
per cent of failures. Count your failures, not the apparent
successes in such dubious things!! The curious observation
that the presence of a strange person, making no noise, in the
room in which one sleeps normally, will arouse gradually the
sleeper, which the author found, himself, confirmed by good
experiments, seems to be due to an unconscious effect of
our now almost extinct "scent." That each person has a pe-
culiar "scent" is proved by the dogs; in a similar manner,
but much weaker, our now dying out organ of scent is still
strong enough, unconsciously, to cause an uneasiness when
we smell a strange human "scent," and we awaken. Anyone
can easily prove that a dog, sound asleep, is much easier
awakened by a stranger holding his hand near the dog's nose
than the master could do it by the same careful process; a
handkerchief is still better, because of easier noiseless opera-
tion. Palmistry — as expounded by really bright people like
"Cheiro," has already a tinge of science; it contains less of
the elements of fraud than "theosophy," "spiritism," "mes-
merism," etc.; but it is, even in the hands of the best, ninety-
nine per cent fancy, and, perhaps, one per cent of very vague
observations of a logical connection between the folding of
the skin of the hand and cerebral or mental arrangements.
Mental, we repeat, is always used in this book as "belonging
to the brain in activity." Telling fortune by cards, sticks,
voodooism, charms, philters, have small kernels of something
true, surrounded by a cotton bale of fraud.

Phrenology^ is an excellent intellectual pastime; it was,
unfortunately, provided with its vocabulary at a time when
the world was still much more ignorant as to the brain than
it is to-day; when the idea of a gaseous soul was predomi-
nant, and Jehovah still ruled the language. In the treat-
ment by the most skilful operators it is probably to-day
twenty per cent scientific and progressive, forty per cent

118

more or less empty verbiage, and thirty per cent fraud; the
operator is aided by physiognomy, utterances of the subject,
all outside influences, hence fraud. Its qualities, or groups,
are nonsensical in many ways: Ideality, sublimity, rever-
ence, tune, time, locality, and many others, are misnomers;
its ivenesses, while a good word formation, are unreal, too
much popularified expressions to be the true equivalents of
what is meant by them, etc. At the same time we recom-
mend: Study phrenology from best sources, not tenth copies
of copies of copies, etc. Modem phrenology is still too much
bumpology; the phrenology which measures the depth and
width of the brain in certain directions voices a true spirit.

Physiognomy is almost a science; it is the highest of the many
systems to tell the character of a person — character being
only a different aspect of "mind^^ — from outward appearances.
Even in common daily intercourse we use physiognomy ex-
tensively. "I don^t like her nose" is, translated into physiog-
nomy, "That nose expresses to me a mind which is uncongen-
ial to my own; I cannot give the precise reason, but the im-
pression is the one stated." Every feature of the face forms
a special fascinating science, an intellectual game of features.
The forehead, hair, ears, eyes, nose, cheeks, mouth, chin,
tell, each in its own language, the full story of the mind
behind them.

Mind reading, as practiced by Bishop and others, is a hi^h
art of "muscle reading," requiring a highly developed, keen,
concentrated intellect; it is little science, but very much art;
an intellectual toy of high grade, probably science twenty
per cent, art seventy per cent, fraud (name!) ten per cent.

Second-sight, aside of muscle reading, is a fraud. While
the Koentgen Kays of electricity have opened a possibility
of seeing through otherwise opaque substances, our sun con-
tains not a trace of these rays; if he did, photographic
plates could not be preserved in dark paper boxes for years
without being "fogged." The Roentgen Rays penetrate in
five minutes through six inches of densest wood, stone, min-
eral, even through thin metals, and darken a photographic
paper or plate behind those obstacles rapidly. Second-sight
is a trick of "mediums" to gain greater fame, reputation
and more money. All the experiments and claimed results

119

allow of a much more logical and entirely different explan-
ation.

The "fourth state of matter*' of Prof. Crooks is as yet tdo
deep even for many scientists. No one can deny its possi-
bility, but the experiments to prove it are too complex, and
as we know too little as yet of electricity too many other ex-
planations are possible; — it can, however, not by any means
be classed as fraudulent, or even defective; it is entirely in
suspense. Unfortunately, Prof. Crooks showed himself weak-
minded in contact with "spiritists."

The "fourth dimension'* of Prof. Zoellner is, in view of
the painful credulity of the late spectroscopist, as proved by
Spiritist Slade, much more in doubt. It seems to transcend
normal intellects and to approach insane delusions; can, how-
ever, not be relegated into impossibilities or fraud.

Planchette, table tipping, human magnet, etc., and many
similar supposedly occult phenomena are interesting toys for
intellectual self-deception, but absolute frauds.

Ghosts are one and all delusions.

Ignis fatuus (whisp oVill) does not exist. The latie Prof .
Liebig offered a reward of $100 to any person who would
show him a spot where it could be seen. In spite of the fact
that he published this reward everywhere in the villages of
the sub-Alpine extensive morasses of Bavaria, where they
were said to be particularly abundant, he never had an oc-
casion to even investigate a report, except one, and this
proved to be a common case of fire-fly or lightning bug.

IX.

PHASES OF PANTHEOS AND EELIGIONS.— GODS.

It would not seem impossible of thought that about 4000
B. C. several denizens of other planets, not so very much
above us in intellect, otherwise we could not perceive them,
reached our earth, attached themselves to certain elements
in our centers of consciousness, connecting the individuals
by "nerves" of creed and thus constituted a complex being
in which each believer represents only a part of a ganglion

120

in the brain of that more exalted being. Some of these com-
plex beings lived only a short time — Jupiter, Minerva, Juno,
Pluto, etc. — some much longer. Their ages are: Greek Gods,
1500 B. C- to 400 A. D., or 1,900 years; Brama, 2500 B. C.
to 1897 A. D., perhaps 4,000 years more; Allah, 622 A. D.
to, perhaps, 2700 A. D.; Catholicism, an offspring of Jeho-
vah creed, by generation, not by division, from 300 A. D.
to, perhaps, 3000 A. D.; Specific Protestantism, from 1517
A. D. to 2500 A. D.; Baptism, from 1750 to 2300 A. D.;
etc. Creeds impress the author as nerves and ganglia of com-
plex beings called religions, really individuals or entities,
forms of Pantheos in the shape of a creed. The Jehovah
offsprings by division (Mahommetanism) are less vigorous
than those by union "only begotton son." The "spirit"
of an idea of Pantheos, just one degree beyond Jehovah,
is already vastly more extended than Jehovah itself. Jap-
anese rationalists, Chinese rationalists, Hindoo rationalists.
Unitarians, all share with Pantheists a surprising sim-
ilarity of logic and views much closer even than Catho-
lics and Universalists. There is room in the world for
a complete separate creed for every individual, which
grows and rises, fades and vanishes, with that individual.
As component parts of larger creeds we will live with
them, attaching ourselves to still larger ones. The creeds
are. nothing but our impressions and names of real ex-
istences, of which we form part. As we participate in all
those more complex units of intellect and emotion, to just
that degree will we be immortal, as the unit to winch they
belong is immortal. We only call immortality the next
higher step of existence, which, by degrees, brings us to still
higher ones. Admitting that Jehovah lived 4,000 years, and
will live 4,000 more, his followers have enjoyed in their re-
ligious life and existence a life of 8,000 years — to the phil-
osophers of 1000 B. C. an "infinite time." Because, for a time
being, we are broken up as individuals, does not at all mean
that our essential parts, Ego of body, and Ego of soul and
man, do not live right along. Death is merely the temporary
breaking up of a certain individual unit; we will meet with as
many deaths as we enjoy sleeps; have seen and will see as
many existences as we draw breaths. We may belong for a
time to Jehovah, Allah, Wotan, Jupiter, and even Satan.

121

Jesus "his only begotten son" stands and falls with Jehovah.
His only life is in belief, a mental attitude which his creed
desires to see cultivated, so as to easily dispose of his wares.
Jesus, the philosopher of Nazareth, is, as far as his original
claims are considered, and if his philosophy is taken specifi-
cally, i. e., in what it is new, the adopted son of Jehovah, al-
though the language used might be figurative. Buddha, 300
years before him preached all his purely human principles:
"love your eneiny," "love thy neighbor as thyself," "what
does it help man to gain the world but lose his soul?"
are all Buddhist teachings. Every idea of the Serinon
on the Mount, except the specific Jehovah part, was
preached by Buddha 300 years before Christ. Where
was Jesus between 12 years of age and 30 years?
That powerful restless intellect may have come in con-
tact with Buddhist teachings, upon which he afterwards
engrafted Hebrew mythology. His characteristic gospel
of heedlessness for the future, self-imposed pauperism,
socialistic communism, are no more suited for best de-
velopment of our times as the similar teachings of the Paris-
ian or Chicago anarchist. It is characteristic that while
Jehovah and his assistant, Jesus, were in the ascendancy
that the world receded in civilization. The Egyptian king-
dom of 2000 B. C, and the Roman empire of 100 B. C. to
400 A. D., were vafetly more civilized, as we use the term now,
than Christian Europe in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and
even sixteenth centuries. With the death-blow of Jehovah
cult and freeing from the ascetic gospel of Jesus man began
to conquer the earth; the French Revolution, a somewhat
offensive protest against the intolerance of the Jehovahites,
is the dawn of modern civilization; even if 20,000 people were
killed by the bloodthirsty vandals then reigning, this was not
one-hundredth of the people killed under the guise and pur-
pose of expanding the gospel of Jehovah. "Our God " as
commonly used, is still mostly Jehovah, although Pantheos
is to-day slowly and quietly crowding him out; by impercep-
tible degrees the transition from God, which means Jehovah,
to God, which means the next successive form of Pantheos,
is slowly establishing itself in human minds; all at once the
world, or at least the telling intelligent part of it will real-
ize that the Jehovah who enjoyed the odor of burnt meat,

122

the smell of blood, the piece of male skin, the anointing of
the left toe with oil, the God who had so carelessly attended to
his world so that he had to send a son to redeem it again, a
God who wagered with Satan about Job, etc., has gone into
the past with Wotan, who drank mead to intoxication, with
Jupiter who, under the guise of cattle, birds and monsters,
seduced human maidens, with Allah, who desires the blood of
every one not believing in him, and countless other sub-gods.
It matters not whether millions believe in him, many more
millions have found consolation and hope in Brama; the
quantity test, if applied to Jehovah and "God" formerly and
to-day is certainly wrong, because for every one who died in
faith in Jehovah or "God," three at least have died in faith
in Brama.

That is why many object to the word "God" to-day. Je-
hovah, under the claim that he is the God, tries to prolong
his reign; a statement may have been true 2,000 years ago,
but need not be so to-day. The "God" of our churches is
Jehovah, not quite equal in rank with Brama, but above
Jupiter, Allah, Wotan. Let us not be deceived and attach
our future to a mortal "God." Because Brama, Jehovah,
Allah, etc., represent more coiftplex, and, perhaps, higher
phases of Pantheos than even a nation, does not prove that
they are the highest we may grasp. Brama represents, cer-
tainly, a more refined, broader minded "God" than Jehovah,
who, for 2,000 years was satisfied with a small nation of at
best 5,000,000 Jews. All those gods are units superior in
some point to man, but they are units producing only through
their followers the aggregate unit — a creed or religion. They
are, however, not sufficiently superior to satisfy the best and
highest type of human thought possible to-day.

These gods are mortal. Wotan and Jupiter and their
courts are dead. Satan is at the undertaker. Even Jehovah,
figuratively speaking, is an old man. Brama is more vigor-
ous than any. Allah was bom in violence and will die in vio-
lence. There is no "disrespect" in this. It merely states that
the temporary possession of the highest intellects by these
units, or waves of phases of Pantheos, is passing from their
control. What does it help Jupiter if some savages still be-
lieve in him; his doom was sealed the moment the highest in-
tellect of his time found his philosophy, worship and prospects

123

not representing the highest and best available logic of their
senses. Thus, with Satan; in the eleventh century, he pos-
sessed as a reality the best Caucasian intellects, was provided
with cloven foot, horns and an arrow-head tail; even in
1520 "Luther saw him;" in 1700 in New England, witches —
his daughters — were burnt; to-day hardly the common vul-
gar intellectual "herd" takes his cloven feet, horns and tail
seriously; he has become more and more diluted, ethereal,
spiritual, even refined; his "sin" has appeared pardonable,
until to-day he has resolved into a vague mist, a mere sleight-
of-hand performer, a Herman, a passing phase of Pantheos.
The same with Jehovah. In 1800 B. C. he dined with Abra-
ham; in 33 A. D. only his voice was heard from the clouds;
from 300 A. D. till the present time he even did not speak
through an intermediary; his wrath, which destroyed Sodom
and Gomorrah, the babies of the Cananites, Jerusalem, etc.,
only brought, by inference, the plague of 1440 A. D.; while
to-day no United States weather observer would even dare to
ascribe the St. Louis cyclone of 1896 to Jehovah's direct
work. Thus, Jehovah has become more and more demater-
ialized, until to-day he is only a phase of Pantheos beyond his
zenith. The author does not, for an instant, imply his non-
existence; Jehovah existed as some transient form of some
phase of Pantheos, but was and is not the highest Pantheos,
although his followers frequently tell, consciously or uncon-
sciously, that sophistry. Brama, who was and is much more
"spiritual" than Jehovah, for this reason is more vigorous;
he is nearer the true nearest stage of Pantheos than Jehovah,
Satan or Allah. The characteristic of a small god is lack of
toleration. Jupiter killed Socrates, killed thousands of Christ-
ians; Jehovah killed millions, from the Cananites to the Az-
tecs. The fights which really sounded the climax blow to
Jehovah were those of the sixteenth and seventeenth cen-
turies in Central Europe; from thence he waned. Jesus, be-
cause of a great element of spirituality, injected into him
from Buddha, has considerable more power of resistance
than even Jehovah or Satan — Satan is many things. As
Vishnu of the Brahmins he is a high type of a phase of Pan-
theos; as the Satan who disputes with Jehovah about Job,
he is a power equal with Jehovah; as the Satan who tempts
Jesus, he is a silly fool; for, if he, so much wiser than man,

124

an angel, did not know that Jesus was the only begotten son
of Jehovah, who would have known? And, knowing this, why
did he offer to the son of Jehovah that which, according to
the creed of Jehovah believers, already belonged all to Je-
hovah, for a very vulgar ceremony of worship? The idea of
that fool of Satan supposing that Jesus, if he was what he
claimed for himself, would worship such a poor fool as that
Satan was, is so utterly absurd that only an insane brain
could invent it. Being so utterly absurd, is it a real occur-
rence — truth stranger than fiction? If it was, it places
Satan as a power co-ordinate with Jehovah. Jehovah's
son only came out superior because of the help of
the phase of Pantheos frequently hinted at — something
which controls Jehovah, namely, Law or Destiny, Mor-
als, Justice. Through the dark ages of supremacy
of Jehovah, 800 A. D. to 1700 A. B., Satan also
enjoyed his zenith in the world of intellects as a kind of
graminivorous man belonging to the group of ruminants;
he is to-day more an object of jest than of reality. Only in-
sane asylums contain real devils. Is the Devil the female
element or male element of the Jehovah group? The general
tendency is much nearer to give to Jehovah the nature of
a female — ^the insistence of ceremonies, the temperament,
the emphasis upon emotions, while Satan is of the violent
male character. Satan is only "wicked" as compared to
Jehovah. We do not know cither's real character. Are
Satan and Jehovah a couple from another planet who have
entered and possess many human intellects and therein find
their existence? There is no levity or "irreverence^^ in this
statement, merely a philosophical suggestion, offering, per-
haps, logical explanation of phenomena about these strange
phases of Pantheos. Vishnu and Brama, the trinity, are
such unions. Is the "Holy Spirit" the deified reformed
principle of Satan? Is the Jehovah of B. C. merely the
youthful exuberance of the mature Jehovah of 800 A. D. to
1700 A. D., now declining into senility? Is Satan already
way beyond the mere decline?

Jesus, the son of Jehovah, acts like a man without sex.
Is that a solution of some of his teachings? Human life is
fifty years, Jehovah's may be five thousand years. If his
intellect was only that of the human being, but with electric

125

speed, he may grasp all the intellects possessed by him
within his allotted age, namely, one hundred and fifty mil-
lion annually.

Is Jehovah losing followers because he has already
grasped the maximum of his capabilities? That stage of
Pantheos lying just beyond Jehovah, the Pantheists' nearest
"God," is one which must embrace Jehovah and something
more. Jehovah hates the evil and loves the good; but, if
one enquires for a Jehovaic definition of good and evil one
will find that they move in circles; that the good is that
which "God" loves and the evil that which he hates. All
personal "Gods" are of the Jehovah type, very much alike;
the next step of Pantheos is one which has love and hatred
blended into justice; there is no longer a good or evil, but
only a justice, namely, that law of nature to which even
Jehovah is subject. Has not Jehovah to love the good and
to hate the evil? Is not that an acknowledgment that he is
subject to law? A true judge does not "love the good and
hate the evil," he merely passes judgment; it is only attor-
neys pleading before the judge who indulge in these emo-
tions frequently tempered by their sordid interests. Je-
hovah shares this parallel; for money or equivalent the Cath-
olic church, the most consistent type of Jehovah worship, has
broken its own deepest laws; divorces have been granted,
murder "forgiven," incest sanctioned (see medieval history
replete with those facts). The next stage of Pantheos
"loves" body and soul alike, cares little for pure creeds, little
for desires or wishes beyond what is deserved in due jus-
tice; the quality of mercy is present in the strictest jndge,
but it is a just mercy, not a mercy of whim. In hundreds
of passages does the Bible, Jehovah's imperfect mouthpiece,
acknowledge this submission of Jehovah to the next higher
stage, called law in sciences, justice in human affairs.
"Many are called but few are chosen" expresses another ele-
ment still higher than Jehovah, namely, of fate and destiny,
which will find their first light in the next stage of Pan-
theos; it seems to the author that they even reach beyond
and do not find their full explanation, yet when law and
justice are already well comprehended. Through Jehovah,
we have realized some of the depth of the Pantheos of Jus-

12G

tice. We only will begin to find what fate is after passing
through that of justice.

Each stage of Pantheism began in its embryo in the past
illionity and will stretch through gradual developments into
a future enormously long time; every form of "God'^ may
take its followers along in its course through illionity;
something in the future they all promise. Jupiter and his
folk promised as the least a dim not unpleasant forgetting;
Wotan an endless feast of victories, hunt and wild joys;
Allah a luxurious life of ease; Jehovah alone uses the double
weapon of promise and threat; his promise is vague, all there
is to be is the eternal view of himself, some music and sing-
ing; Brama promises a blissful, rather restful, absorption in
himself. The very fact that Jehovah, in spite of his doubly-
edged future as a whip, has not conquered the world more
fully shows the inherent weakness of his cause. The author
has no doubt that, to a certain degree, all the followers of
these Gods will realize part of these promises; some of the
"lucky men^' now living may be some to enjoy Wptan's
heaven, some Allah^s, some Jehovah^s. . No hope, fear or
expectation can arise in us which is not surpassed by the
actuality. But the realizations will depend to a great ex-
tent on our efforts at present. If Jehovah has no hold on
us, because what he offers seems to us illogical, unjust, be-
cause his proofs of the past seem to us only figments of the
past or dreams substituted for actualities, this very fact of
being true to ourselves will free us from Jehovah and will
bring us before the next higher Pantheos, that of Justice,
in a suitable frame of receptiveness to receive the next series
of new informations, new emotions, new powers, or if it be
"fate," of less. We enter futurity, so to speak, without
any divine mortgage on us. Fate or destiny represent our
entrance into phases of Pantheos greatly slower than our
present one; they represent our share in the evolving of a
much grander Pantheos than was or is at present. As the
length of a breath is to that of a day (1 : 20,000) so the
length of a day to a human life (1 : 20,000), so perhaps the
length of a human life to a resurrection period or summa-
tion life (1 : 20,000); and as the breath of to-day is the
foundation or factor of a life in years, thus our present life,
which is only a breath in Future Pantheos, will be the f oun-

127

dation of lives to come. Thus our present "fate" is merely
that of a day of our existence in Pantheos.

We must not overrate our brains. Because we cannot
grasp one thousand years, there is no need to think that it
is not graspable. We have most certainly lived an eternity
of the past. Whatever view we take, we have existed from
eternity. If we accept Jehovah, we have logically to ascribe
to him a knowledge of what he was doing when he created
the world. To assume he felt lonesome, so alone in eternity,
and, to amuse himself, made the world, is too anthropomor-
phous and childish; even then he could not have made these
laws without knowing that they produce me, unless he was
indeed only a small sub-god. If we believe in Brama we
wandered through countless creatures up to man. Do we
remember anything? No man alive can even give more
than a dream. Anything not positively illogical is a good
supposition. But the fact remains: Do we remember the
eternity of the past? No, and this justifies us in saying
that as a specific Ego combination "John Doe,'^ the man en-
dowed with it, exists for the first time, not that the traces
and ancestors of his Ego of Soul and Body may not or have
not existed in many forms, but it was not in that peculiar
tangible, defined form. "Nature,^^ another popular pantheis-
tic term, "never repeats itself .^^ What is the "destiny" of
the individual? To judge from present experiences it is to
experience all the phases of Pantheos. We would like to
do it as pleasantly as possible; hence all life partakes in
about equal amounts of "good" and "evil," pleasant and
unpleasant, with just a trace of preponderance towards the
pleasant, or else suicide is sure to follow. No matter what
condition man may be in, while one trait of life is pleasant
enough to counterbalance the sum of unpleasant ones, he
will not think of suicide. ^ Sometimes "fate" steps in curi-
ously to save a man; of course this fate is nothing but the
result of the natural "laws" of that phase of Pantheos to
which fate belongs, but inexplicably to us, it saves or de-
stroys man. We all know such marvellous chance events.
A destructive experience is, e. g., the fate of a criminal
who killed his wife and was traced by the beauty of her
child!

Hence, man's past destiny was to experience the world of

128

the past; the future one will be to experience that of the
future; the trend of his progress is to realize higher and
higher more and more complex phases of Pantheos; only by
developing ourselves will we fit ourselves to come out vic-
torious from an unpleasant future, or be adapted to a more
exalted agreeable one.

All so-called positive religions are the culture of only a
part of man for the benefit of a single narrow phase of
Pantheos, while Pantheism aims at the cultivation of the
complete Pantheos of humanity composed of harmonious
souls in harmonious bodies forming harmonious men be-
longing to harmonious families and tribes conquering in a
harmonious manner the earth, its wealth and power, aim-
ing at the most intelligent, most just, most loving man, liv-
ing the longest and happiest, most perfect life possible, pre-
pared to enter the phases of Pantheos to come with the most
complete preparation possible. All other religions, are one-
sided, only Pantheism attempts to do justice to all sides of
man; especially do most religions slight the body; yet with-
out body I am not John Doe.

In all "positive" religions the aim is to build up a "King-
dom of God;" but this "God" is, so to speak, a foreigner,
despot, autocrat, while in Pantheism the God is the republic
of humanity, united into a grand phase of Pantheos in-
cluding everything assimilable from Teutonism, Grecian-
ism, Jehovahism, Christianity, Buddhism and other creeds.
Man will only "know God" as he gradually becomes "God,"
builds him up out of himself; for, everything is God and out
of the simpler elements every higher phase of Pantheos is
building itself every second, day, year and epoch. Abso-
lutely everything is alive in Pantheos, the sulphate of baryta
and the human Ego, Jehovah and Satan, all contributing
their share towards the development of higher phases of
Pantheos.

We sometimes think ourselves so great and our race so
important. One being with an electrical brain can think
the thoughts of 150,000,000 people in the same time and
with the same effort with which one man does his thinking.
With brains working with the speed of gravitation, one be-
ing could think all the thoughts of nearly 8,000,000,000,000
men, or more than ever lived on the globe as "men," in

129

the same time and with the same effort. A body moving
with speed of thought (ten feet a second) could travel to
the sun in one hundred and forty years; on the wings of
light in eight minutes; our fastest cannon ball would re-
quire over nine and one-half years; a body moving with
gravitation speed over the earth could visit every square foot
in seven and one-half seconds; while travelling in a cannon
ball this would require two million years, and upon the
"wings of thought^^ four hundred million years! Hence our
brains are not yet the summit of perfection! Already the
trained intellect and hand of a stenographer can follow three
hundred and fifty words a minute while common people write
ten or twenty; the telegrapher's ear can make out four hun-
dred signs a minute, while the untrained ear, even if know-
ing them, cannot separate five, etc.; the bright intellect of
to-day would have been a phenomenal one at the time of
Christ, a "God-like" one in Homer's times and unintelli-
gible because too high in the Swiss Stone age; thus our
best thoughts of to-day will be shallow platitudes in 3000
A. D., and nothing but "a mass of silly errors and ignorant
falsehoods'' in 5000 A. D., but to reach that stage the in-
tellect of 4000 A. D. has to pass through the intellectual:
dawn of 1000 B. C, through the sunrise of 1792.

THE PURPOSES OF PANTHEISM.

Why, if there is so little difference in what we believe,
do we "preach," so to speak. Pantheism? Any religion is
good enough to live by, but the test of a religion is on the
deathbed, in that supreme moment, when the hypocrite will
feel his castle of soap bubbles crumbling. When we stand
before the greatest step of our lives, that into the unknown
future, then we need hope, we need a dim outline of a logi-
cal suggestion of what may come; we need the comfort of a
harmonious life of which death is not the breaking of the
instrument, but the last final cord and consonance.

He who has witnessed a Roman Catholic die must feel the
f

130

horror of that death. The poor morient has lived under a
religion so full of sins, threats and penalties that he must
feel that he has committed more than he could ever have
told his confessor. Without verbal confession no pardon,
even forgetfulness is no excuse; nay, if he forgot to confess
a "sin" and partakes of the communion service he merely
adds another capital sin. If he reads without horror, or
reads at all, anti-Catholic writings, like Protestant news-
papers, writings, etc., and does not confess it and ^^repent,"
he has another capital sin to answer for. One capitisil sin
according to this religion condemns the poor ignorant sinner
to eternal hell. No wonder that many Catholics, on the
deathbed, become raving religious maniacs, seeing the lurid
creations of a wily, tricky priesthood ready with forks and
tailfi and fiery tongues to receive them; add to all this horror
of the soul the lugubrious services of the crafty clergy, the
last unction, the dreary, ancient stereotyped prayers of the
church and the poor dying believer may be said to be well
prepared for the hell of his imagination.

At the same time a little comfort, to be fair, may be de-
rived from the presence of the powerful deputy — at least
powerful in imagination — of Jehovah, battling with the
Devil for the soul; the priests have realized the enormous
power which may be wielded near the deathbed; they have
for sale even potent charms of supposed power beyond the
grave; a mass costs only seventy-five cents and any Catholic
or infidel can buy it, if he will only forego guarantee and
receipt. Aside of the ten commandments, the seven cardinal
sins, at least dozens of sectarian sins exist within the Catho-
lic creed, whose retaining power is solely by intimidation.
What man can even reasonably hope to die without a car-
dinal sin? Only a hermit or a prisoner in his cell; for, all
those living in this world among fellow beings must commit
daily hundreds of more or less grave sins.

We must also not forget that the papal bulls are always
in force, never abrogated; these bulls define all intercourse
with Protestants as highly sinful. For over fifteen hun-
dred years almost every year one or more of these bulls
were or are issued; they are, so to speak, the statutes of
the church defining many additional sins. Can any Catho-
lic escape sinning most outrageously? Even if he escapes

131

hell, he has the purgatory to go through; in spite of the
indulgences which may be bought or earned even after the
death of the beneficiary by some friends (for forty days to
ten thousand years), this purgatory does not seem to be a
place of pleasure. A Catholic dies always with 10,000
chances of being in hell in future life, 1,000,000,000 chances
of being in the purgatory against one chance of going to
heaven. It takes all the glibness of the priests, heavy bequests
of money for masses and other forms of Catholic income to
cause the poor believer to die in the Catholic faith, simply
because he dares not die in any other, not because it is a
pleasant faith to live or die in. The Catholic faith is one
long string of scare and bluff from cradle to coffin; the
Catholic God and his numberless deputies, the priests, re-
quire constant propitiation by cash and a submissive spirit,
with a promise of only "not being angry."

When the Presbyterian approaches his end he begins to
become seriously alarmed whether he is one predestined to
heU or to heaven. Is that likely to cause a peaceful death?
The matter of sins is less important with him than with the
Catholic; but, for what is he predestined? There is lacking
a really powerful authority to assure him, yet such is hu-
man hope that very few of that creed ever die in the horror
of being predestined to "eternal damnation;" in fact the
mass of them dies in the serene, sublimely ridiculous idea
that being a Presbyterian means already predestination to
heaven, while those predestined to other places are simply
the non-Presbyterians. Judging from the character of the
adherents here, their hell must be an interesting and their
heaven an insufferably dull place. Others will say that the
Presbyterians merely changed the label on the door, but
left their heaven a very undesirable hell. People have died
happy or contented, or rather resigned in all creeds, even
the lurid Catholic faith; they assume the collapse attitude
before taking chloroform.

A Mahommetan cannot do any worse after death than
extinction according to his creed; but, if he has performed
certain rites punctually, he will travel straight away into
paradise where the smiling, laughing Houri awaits him.
No wonder the Turkish soldier courts death (see battle of
Omdhurman, Sept., 1898), to him it is the most pleasant step

132

in his life; with his last breath begins the first answering
smile to his favorite Houri. He knows of no complex
graded code of sins with complex hell or puigatory punish-
ments. "La illah il allah wha Mohammet ras ul allah" is all
he needs to enter the golden portals. If he can bring the
spirit of his cimetar with him showing the blood of the
Giaurs on it a still more charming Houri will greet him.
He cannot read, cannot write, knows nothing of the lan-
guage of those who preach Jehovah, Christ, Brama or Pan-
theos to him; hence his fancies of childhood follow him
till he realizes them with his last breath. He is educa-
tionally and linguistically absolutely deaf to all disillu-
sionizing influences of the Occident; a happy death, indeed,
is his; for personal sacrifice of life the Arabs and Turks have
in all great battles been conspicuous; in fact, as the great
battle of Poitiers about 700 A. D. shows, they were rather
too eager to be killed. The Jew expects to meet in the
hereafter father Abraham, the patriarchs and Jehovah on a
rather familiar pastoral footing. While his ideas about it
are not any clearer or vaguer than those of other creeds, the
worst that can happen to him seems to be separation in
Hades — not Hell! For, strange as it may seem to Christians,
the Jews and their old testament have no settled conviction
about the existence of a positive place of torture, "a hell,"
rather of a negative place of separation, a Hades without
that horrible idea of an "eternity" of punishment for an
extremely vanishing short ill-considered act called sin; in
many passages (ecclesiast) the Bible even teaches absolute
annihilation for all, man and beast.

Of the myriads of sects we need not speak; they expect or
fear according to their creeds; the Baptist gets ready his
certificate of immersion, the Methodist points to his conver-
sion at a revival, whatever this "conversion" may mean, the
Universalist hopes that he is right in believing that there
is no external hell; the Unitarian applies at Brama's shrine
with a large collection of Jehovah and Christian remnant
beliefs; the Adventist is sure that in a short time he will
return amid the blare of the great trumpet and accom-
panied by the beast with feet of clay with seven candle-
sticks in its mouth and invade the earth; the Lutheran has
only to be strong in faith to counterbalance any sins he may

133

have committed according to or against his creed; the Con-
gregationalist dies happy because he is a descendant of the
Puritans or Mayflower immigrants who cannot possibly fail
to be received with a "Exceedingly honored, Mr. Bradford,
to see you here;'' no foreigners in his heaven.

The followers of Brama and Budda die all far more peace-
fully and contentedly than any Christians. They are re-
turning to Brama and eternal peace.

The convinced spiritualist does not die, he merely becomes
immaterial, non-corporeal, but continues to live among us.

What is death to the Pantheist? It resembles most that
of Buddhist, but is not as negative. The Pantheist tries to
make his death merely an interruption by rest of his de-
velopment through the ages. It is a spell of deep, thor-
ough rest until the laws of Pantheos bring about the next
conscious appearance. Death alters nothing, changes noth-
ing; it is merely the life-night's rest after the life-day's
work; his next life-day will depend on the preceding one.
If he goes to his life-rest with a day harmoniously rounded,
without leaving undue or unreasonable debts of sentiment,
material comfort and happiness behind him, the general
reasonable expectation is that it will help him in whatever
his future lot; the Pantheist logic does not hold out the
hypersexual joys of Mahommet, or the unlimited repetitions
of Hallelujahs and harp twangings of the Christian Protest-
ants, or the hell, heaven and purgatory of the Catholics,
even not the eternal oblivion or dreamy sleep in Brama of
the Hindoos, but this logic holds out as reasonable after a
life-night of limited duration a subsequent life-day of rea-
sonable pleasures and pains, repeating itself by degrees up-
ward and downward until his phase of Pantheos is merged
into the as yet utterly incomprehensible. Only those may
dread the death of a Pantheist whose life trend has been
downward, but even to them is held out the logicon of a
chance in the next life-day of rallying and improving, al-
though they may be like scholars in a school, compelled to
stay another year in the same class. There is nothing odi-
ous in death to a Pantheist who has lived a true, consistent,
just life, observing the main principle of justice to his ability
in all his dealings; his highest phase perceptible is the Pan-
theos of Harmonious Perfection, if he moved toward it he

134

need have no fear. Nature moves in analogies, as a baby
builds up the man from consecutive spells of wakeness and
sleep, thus will our man in Pantheos consist of periods of
life-days and life-nights.

We will not begin to remember previous existences until
our apparatus of thought and logic is vastly more developed.
We have the curious analogon that not one person remem-
bers the first six hundred or eight hundred days of his or
her present life. That might imply that in our cosmic
life we might not remember the preceding eight hundred or
one thousand life-days followed by an equal number of life-
nights (deaths), and be at present perhaps in the one hun-
dredth or twentieth or eight hundredth baby life-day of our
entire cosmic pantheic existence. We must also never forget
that according to all creeds and to our logic there is an eter-
nity of the past behind us. Even if the world existed only for
five thousand years, God (Jehovah, Brama, Chronos, etc.)
existed before it and as "His thoughts are eternal," we
existed in "His thoughts" for eternity. Does that eternity
weigh on our memories? Not in the least; apparently it was
only an instant, and even if our present life's dream be
added it still remains only an instant. Even the most event-
ful life viewed backwards is only a rapid dream. Our sys-
tem of thought grasps the future as vast, never coming,
unlimited, while, the moment it has become the past, it
rushes with marvellous rapidity into oblivion; evidently the
capacity of our mind is vastly greater for future than for
past experiences, a logicon which would point to the possi-
bility that our greatest improvement is to come from the
future and has not been in the past. We consider this great
difference of our mind between grasping the past and the
future the most potent argument for progress and future
potentiality rather than descent from the past downward
that we have found.

After we have exhausted the maximum of terrestrial Pan-
theos we may pass into the realm of the solar Pantheos,
from there into stellar and cosmic Pantheos and thus be-
come conscious elements of larger and larger phases while
elaborating in detail smaller and smaller ones; every mole-
cule in our brains feels in consonance the consciousness of
100,000,000,000,000,000 of other molecules and cells; hence,

135

if all the Egos of all men were m one being, they would feel
equally its consciousness; the Egos of all the 1,000,000,000,-
000 people who lived since 1200 A. D. would have easily
room in a single ganglion of a single human brain.

Pantheism does not hold as a reasonable logicon that a
person by mere dying will immediately gain all the knowl-
edge and information and more which he might have ac-
quired had he properly used his chances while living. Too
many Christian sects hold to the belief that right after death
man will *^now all.*^ All at once, by merely dying, the per-
son who missed every opportunity he could possibly miss of
learning and self improvement on this globe, will have all
that information stuffed into him, according to many Chris-
tian creeds. There is no justice and logic in it. We will
emerge in the next life with not one iota more of knowledge
than we left the present one with. Of what use would
the suddenly acquired knowledge of logarithms be to an
Irish saloonkeeper who died strong in his faith? He would
even be made uncomfortable because he would not know
as to whether they are eaten fried or raw or played with a
bat or a raquet or golfstick or raced in handicaps or sweep-
stakes. It has not to be forgotten that even the most rap-
idly acquired knowledge requires a long precultivation of the
mind without which it is simply impossible to absorb and
assimilate it.

The heaven of the astronomer, fitted out with innumerable
marvellously fine instruments for observing parallaxes,
spectrology and data of stars would be an insufferably dull
place to the lover of horse races whose heaven in his inmost
fancy is filled with imp. colt, b. m. and similar horsey na-
tions; neither is prepared to enjoy the other man's heaven;
hence a logical heaven is an individual heaven, which again
leads to the logicon: After a life-night, another life-day
based upon the preceding one.

136

XI.
POWEB OF 'TAITH/'

What is "Faith?'' The firm self -centered, energizing opin-
ion that something can or cannot be done, that something is
going or not going to happen. In this it is different from
"belief/' which, correctly used, is only a form of acceptance
of the account of past happenings conflicting or agreeing
with our ordinary logical processes. When used correctly
the two are distinctly different; faith is an energizing atti-
tude, belief an observant receptive attitude; faith is the
energy based upon belief. In the verb "I have faith in
that" and "I believe in that" the shading is less marked,
although even there the "I have faith in that" implies that
I act in accordance with that faith, while "to believe" is rath-
er lukewarm. Faith is the yeast in a dough of beliefs. Faith
is the electric current in the wires of belief. Faith is even
the soul in a body of beliefs. Faith is a warm Latin deriva-
tive word (fides), belief a cold Germanic word. The Ger-
man, French and other languages have no good words for
faith, only for belief, and the author thinks that the very
foundation of Lutheranism would have to be remodeled if
the German "Glaube" (belief) had not to serve for belief
and faith, ^ven the Greek as used in the Bible has not the
distinction; faith and belief are purely English and most
excellent words aside from all application to religion; in
all cases where the translation of the Bible uses "faith" it
is an Anglicism; the Bible and Greek language know only
a "belief." A believer in Christ is a far less powerful
Christian than one who has faith in Christ. The one is
merely a book on tlie shelf, the otlier a life modeled after
an ideal whicli the one who leads it moulded from his con-
ception of Christianity.

When belief is shaken no great damage is done, but when
faith departs the life of the thing is destroyed; frequently
faith and belief have to go together, but the cases are numer-

137

ous where faith survived belief; it may be said it was faith
rather than belief which impelled the Southerners to keep
on fighting after the battle of Gettysburg; their belief of
ultimate success may have been shaken, but not the faith in
and to their cause. Many a Turk who died for Allah was
not very clear in his belief, but unwavering in his faith; be-
lief partakes of elements of logic; faith, of elements of ijn-
pulses and sentiments; belief is some grade of logic; faith has
little reference to the logic of the thing, only to its execution.
Just because so many Christians "believe in Christ,'^ but
have no faith in him, do we see millionaires going to churches
without even thinking of the Camel and the Needle's Eye, or
the instruction: Give everything to the poor and follow me.
There is far more faith among llindoos, Mohammetans and
Parsees, than among Christians. Of course, some form or
grade of belief or conviction always precedes the faith, just as
the mixing of the dough precedes its fermentation. A curi-
ous illustration of faith the author met in his youth. As a
boy of six to seven years he used to swim well in the beauti-
ful stream back of his home. He was put in a boys' mili-
tary school; they had a fine swimming pool, and for three
seasons labored the swimming master with him to teach him
swimming; an armor of cork was put around him; the teach-
er, with pole and string, walked along the path counting
one, two, three, four; 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. The author followed
most painstakingly, too much so, and did not learn how to
swim. One afternoon, after three years of vain attempts of
learning, he came to the pool before the swimming teacher;
the odd (?) idea occurred to him whether the same kind of
swimming he had practiced as a very small boy at liome
would also be swimming here. He struck out, the pool was
ten feet deep; and, lo and behold, he could swim just as
well in water ten feet deep as in water four feet deep! When
his teacher came, he was just speechless that the boy had
been trying for three years to learn vainly how to swim and
had known it all the. time. In this case the dread of the
deep water (dread is only a negative of faith, but of the same
kind), painful attention to stereotyped rules, insufficient self-
reliance (another form of faith), had the same effect as utter
lack of practical knowledge of swimming. A little later,
another boy struck him; he meekly accepted it; a friend said:

^138

"Now, if I were you, I would not accept iV He replied: "Do
you think I can whip him?'* "Surely/* Immediately he
went back to the bully, who was twenty pounds heavier, and
was compelled by the teacher, three days later, to beg the
bully's pardon, while the latter lay on his cot in the hospital.
The entire attitude of the author was changed, as in the well-
known picture "before taking" — "after taking"; before tak-
ing faith, a diffident, shrinking, fearful boy; after taking
faith, a courageous, energetic, even savage youngster. How
many boys amount to little because they lack just such in-
spiring occasions? And that little fight gave an impulse
of self-reliance, which lasted for many years afterwards, even
after the name of the boy had been forgotten. No man is
sicker than the one who has "lost his nerve." It is the loss
of faith in himself, his "luck," his capabilities. Almost
every elderly tramp we meet is such an example; the drink-
ing and loafing are only symptoms, but never the real causes.
Many a hard drinker is a good business man, and retains his
"nerve" even up to the delirium tremens, and through it.
Especially frequent is "losing the nerve" among Germans and
Norsemen. Although they have no good word for it; "des-
pair" they use; they are frequently over-educated in empty,
practically worthless, dry, memorized data, and under-edu-
cated in energy, faith and practical life questions, and as a
consequence go under in the struggle of survival of the fittest.
This enormous power of faith, which has built all our
churches, cities, railways, has energized all our actions, enters
deep into our processes of the brain. Why does the man who
is not a Christian, not a Buddhist, not a Mahommetan, or
Parsee, merely an "Infidel", lead as just and unblemished
a life as an adherent to these creeds? He does not believe in
heaven, hell or purgatory, not in Jehovah, Brama, Allah, or
Jupiter, yet millions of such so-called "Infidels" lead just
as "good" e. i. just lives as those who do believe. Is that not
a proof that belief is something rather superficial, unneces-
sary, trifling? But all those men have faith that somehow
or other this is the best plan of living. It also makes no dif-
ference to what race they belong; the Japanese infidel is,
in his code of living, much nearer the German infidel, the
French "atheist", the American advanced "Unitarian", than
are those who follow the tenets of the different Christian

139

sects. This striking uniformity as to what is considered cor-
rect living, shows that there underlies a principle far above
all creeds, in which the unbelievers in creeds have a faith
which they cannot word into a belief. It is their faith in
justice. This uniformity is so great, that even in such small
forms of rules of life as politeness, we find the same princi-
ples; they are those of logic; the faith of those living with-
out "revealed" creeds is the faith in the grand Pantheos of
Justice (Morals), which requires greatest justice possible,
greatest submission of self possible, and greatest regard for
the higher units possible (family, city, state, tribe, nation,
social units, humanity). If entirely correct, it must be har-
monious, which means it must give proper weight to all the
units to which we belong, without allowing one to acquire
undue predominance, unless we feel a special calling and fit-
ness to do so. The "infidel", "rationalist", or "Pantheist",
who desires to lead a correct life has first to ask himself:
What is my best qualification? Am I more fitted for a far-
mer than a clerk, etc.? His next question will be: Can I
serve the nation and myself better single or married? Those
are the two life questions. Many times the question will arise
what to do in a certain case. . In case of unsolvable doubt
it is better to choose the really, not seemingly, harder way of
solving it, but not to choose too hard a road for our strength;
to preserve harmony. In all acts we keep in view not to tres-
pass on the equal rights of your neighbor, but to fight fiercely
for the principle of his not trespassing on ours. It takes
vastly more genuine courage to be an "infidel", "rational-
ist", "atheist", or whatever nicknames the priests have coined
against Pantheists, than to be a catholic, protestant, Mahom-
metan, or Buddhist. Take only one, the Catholic. For him
to become a Pantheist he must reject almost 3,000 years of
cunningly medicated "history", he must abandon the hope
of a Catholic heaven, must dig himself out of the mountain
of bias of his childhood, when he almost learnt his language
repeating the Catholic credo, he must risk separation from all
his devout relatives, he must finally be ready to cover himself,
according to that creed, with such loads of sins as to preclude
any forgiveness, he must finally brave the dangers of an eter-
nal hell with lurid prospects painted on his youthful fancies,
must brave the wrath of the Catholic Jehovah, must even,

140

however painful^ consider the martyr on Golgatha, a poor de-
luded philosopher,and all this for — ^a logical faith inthePan-
theos of Justice in the world. There is, aside of the code of
sins and the enslavement of logic, no difficulty whatever in
being a Catholic. But this code of sins is so enormous that
many a good Catholic has given up in despair; it exceeds
all reasonability, cannot be avoided, and even with best en-
deavors one will be a sinner. If all Catholics did really con-
fess all their sins to their priests, every other Catholic would
have to be a priest, and life would essentially be in the con-
fessional; even the priests would have so many sins to con-
fess that they would have hardly time to hear others. The
ascetic monks were quite logical, the only man free from
Catholic sin is the man who sleeps. We know of conscien-
tious boys who, not to forget, wrote every week about 5O01
distinct so-called sinful acts of theirs — ^not one of which was
a sin! — on a piece of paper, which they read to their confes-
sor. Even in prayer a Catholic can, and every one does, sin.
Hence, every Catholic bows to the Pantheos of Justice out-
side of Jehovah when he hopes that, somehow or other, in
spite of contrary strict church rules, the "sins*^ which he for-
got to confess, may be wiped out. Otherwise he needs no
courage, nobody persecutes, imprisons, lashes him for being
a Catholic, there is no inquisition established against Catho-
lics or Puritans. It takes, to-day, far less courage to be a
Christian than to be a Pantheist; the only danger of a Christ-
ian is that he might be considered weak minded by a Pan-
theist, as if that mattered him any. According to his creed.
Pantheists, or as he calls them, "infidels,^' "atheists,'* etc.,
are anyway wrong in their views, hence their opinion cannot
be of value; but the rationalist or Pantheist needs the most
powerful courage and faith to put his logic against the mil-
lions, especially women, who still defend Jehovah, Satan,
Allah, Buddha; single-handed, so to speak, to brave all their
threats and promises for eternity as against his few years on
eartli, to practice justice merely on a logical conclusion that
it may be the best course. lie puts his logic valorously
against the millions of volumes of Bibles, Puranas, Korans,
Church Fathers, Homiletics, compendia and religious litera-
ture embracing millions of strong believers; but, as usual,
the church tries to reverse it, it is so used to lying of all form

141

that it does not even recognize the courage needed by the
"infidel/^ but puts itself, the immensely money-wealthy
powerful . organization, as being a poor, weak, persecuted
martyr, while it is a wealthy, strong, venomous tyrant wher-
ever it has the faintest chance. It follows the method of
some of the husky beggars on street corners who own se-
cretly large property, and when not receiving alms, revile
the person from whom they expected tribute. Dozens of
such cases are found every year in all parts of the globe,
especially Catholic Spain, Italy, Austria, etc.

XII.
DEATH.

Death to the Pantheist is the moment of falling asleep for
one night of our numerous summation life-nights. Just as
we fall asleep about eighteen thousand times during the
average life of fifty years, an analogy makes it thoroughly
plausible that death is a sleep of a similar longer period.
Even if it seems to us a more violent form of sleep because
our body does not awaken from it while we watch it, is even
put into an odd bed — ^the grave,-^while a label in stone is
put up unconsciously so that future generations may not
disturb the sleeper, if the period is only in proportion of
our days to our entire life, we need not wonder that we,
used to twenty-four hour periods of sleep and wakefulness,
do not follow the long period of sleep to come. In a life
of fifty years each individual night's sleep is one eighteen
thousandth of the life's day and night periods of which it
is composed. If we suppose our 50 years of life to be one
day in one of our full life-ages or summation lives, would not
that give a possible length of the summation life of 900,000
years? And, if we were only in the babyhood of our sum-
mation life, in which we sleep practically months without
recollecting anything, would not a sleep of 1,000 or 3,000 or
even 100,000 years in the grave be a perfect parallel to our
present short sleep? If, on the other hand, our nightly rest
and our life rest bear the relation of molecular human, corpo-

real, mechanical speeds to geological speeds 1 : 890,000,000,
one night's rest of our summation life in the grave is equal to
2,700,000 of our present years. As this comparison appears
frequently the author uses the word human life to show the
life of the present John Doe, that of "summation life" as
that of the individual which is to-day John Doe, may be in
3,000,000 years Tom Brown or John Smith or even Busy
Bill; the summation life is composed of all the human lives
of the same Ego appearing as John Smith 50 years, died
in 1898 A. D., followed by rest or at least life not as John
Smith, 900,000 years, + Tom Brown, 90 years, died in
901988 A. D., followed by rest or life of a different char-
acter, 1,000,000 years + Max Schneider, age 145 years,
+ etc., died 1898+900,000+90+1,000,000+145=1,902,133
A. D. Nay, there is even a higher summarization or in-
tegral, as it is called in mathematics, tie different summa-
tion lives of say 50X10,000,000 or 500,000,000 years each
may again be only a day in the life of a still longer summa-
tion of 250,000,000,000,000,000 years. Figures need never
frighten us; in every drop of water we have present over
600,000,000,000,000,000 molecules; our earth contains over
860,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 pounds of
material. Should seconds and years be more limited in our
universe than pounds and tons? Under brains the
element of time is treated. No reasonable logic can be ad-
vanced to show that it is unreasonable to suppose centillions
of our years of the past and centillions of the future. Our
speculations need never be afraid of exaggerating past and
future eternities, only of not doing them justice; the world is
not smaller than our childish imagination represents it.

During our sleep of terrestrial nights a curious ganglion
belonging to the Ego of the Body shuts off the Ego of the
Soul from the rest of the body; during death a wave of the
phase of Pantheos which may be called the "spirit of the
Earth" cuts off the connection of the Ego of the Soul from
,the body; that "spirit of the Earth" wants the body to pass
through a series of digestions, dissolutions, wants it to enter
into strange beings, forms of life and minerals, so as to
distribute its aches, imperfections, experiences, decays, etc.,
over millions of other forms of life which draw life from the
very elements that caused our death; while the Egos of the

143

soul and body, freed from their attachments, either needing
no rest, pass and follow the elements through the various
absorptipns, or else in a manner as yet wholly dark to us,
seek their rest until again called to unite by their "laws''
for want of a clearer term, into a body suited for their re-
ception. Thus an Ego of the Soul which went harmoniously
with that of its body and became "life-tired" with it, may
follow the Ego of that Body through ages until they unite
again in a new different being. The existence of an Ego of
the Body seems no more unlogical than that of an Ego of the
Soul. If the two were in harmony they may pass through
microbes and plants still joined but without a human body,
hence unable to express themselves humanly. If they were
not harmonious they may separate, each to find a more suit-
able mate. That such a parallel is entirely scientific can
be brought out by illustration by supposing for an instant
that the Ego of the Soul consisted of a group of one hun-
dred peculiar molecules — Somium-psychide. The smallest
bacterium is so large that 20,000,000,000 of these groups
of Somium-psychide could find place in it; hence the en-
trance of one such Ego would not be noticed any more
by the microbe than we would notice the eating of a par-
ticle of dust weighing one thirty thousandth grain. But
supposing a chemist of microscopic dimensions analyzed
the stomach of such a bacterium, he would find traces of what
he called "Psychium;'' the chemist would not destroy the
Ego (Psychium); it would only be combined for the time
being with his chemicals. In present chemistry, if a chem-
ist has gold in his solutions, he can never destroy that gold.
Thus by giving to Ego of Soul and Body merely the
attributes of our coarse seventy chemical elements we can
easily understand why it would be entirely logical to sup-
pose their survival through all the ages until they entered
again a man's system, were absorbed, transferred from a
proper male element to a proper female apparatus and thus
reappeared again as a human child. In this case it would
not even be necessary to suppose such long periods of sleep
between reappearance as a human being; but, when it is
considered how few chances of children conception are
realized as compared with the natural process of their origin,
it will be seen that only in long periods will the ^law of

chance," which is only one ray of the high distant Pan-
theos of Destiny, be favorable to a union of Egos of Soul and
Body in a human child. The most rapid re-embodying may
be in a few years, the slowest in many times millions of
years, even in dim futures when the earth has fallen into the
sun and a race of solar John Smiths, Tom Browns derive
their existence from Egos of terrestrial beings. It may be
said that the more intelligent both Egos were at the time
of death the more easily they will find back their way to
another human being, also the more loving, the more hu-
man, the more will they desire to return. There may be
Egos united in an uncongenial union who may not even de-
sire to return until "Fate" forces them; even the deaths of
many children may be suicides brought about by uncongenial
Egos. Bight after death, for all human purposes, every in-
dividual is totally extinct. To suppose an Ego even of
molecular composition incapable of receiving impressions,
modifications, changes in a human life, would be to deny the
following experiment: Take a photographic plate of chlor-
ide of silver, expose it in a camera to the light from your
mother's face, bring it in a dark room, look at it with anac-
tinic light and you see a yellowish plate perfectly even; shut
it up in a tight place, in fifty years — ^your mother is long
dead — ^you again look at the plate; it is a yellow plate, no
change; you die, your heirs find that old plate, they put it
into a bath of pyrogallic acid and, lo and behold, your (now
"dead") mother's (long ago "dead") smiling face was care-
fully preserved by those "inert," "stupid," "coarsely ma-
terial" molecules of chloride of silver, and the past is united
to the present in an actual positive manner. Hence this
silver chloride plate shows itself possessed of a perfect "mem-
ory,'' it even receives impressions and returns impulses like
our brains and Egos. May not the complex molecules of
Egos be as much superior to the chloride of silver as man
himself is superior to the photographic plate for variety and
number of impressions receivable and storable? We can
carry the parallel even farther. It is practically conceivable
that we take that photographic plate with the picture of your
mother on it and yet not there, as far as our direct senses
go, dissolve it in ammonia, precipitate it, with a molecular
microscope pick out the molecules bearing that picture, re-

145

arrange them, develop them and thus actually out of a solu-
tion evolve again the picture of your mother. If we clumsy
men can even imagine logically such a process, need \ve
logically suppose that the many much higher })hases of
Pantheos acting in our world cannot do many times more
marvellous, perfectly "natural'^ feats?

Our Egos disappear as human beings after death, yet they
carry with them the impulses of all our deeds, the imprints
of all our actions- and will be developed not into a flat ag-
gregate of dark molecules impressing our eyes as pictures,
but as living walking embodiments oi the inheritance from
us.

In the modern Kinetoscope the skill of man has produced
pictures which unite the past with the present; the dance
of years ago is performed before us now. Will the appear-
ance of the future show us to be an "angel" when all the
impressions we made on it were those of a "demon?"

But the Egos of Soul and of Body receive also numerous
impressions of which we know nothing consciously; the
processes of our body are much better understood by either
than they can express; they take this knowledge into the
grave and, when appearing, will profit by it.

Hence it seems most probable that immediately after death
for a long time the dead person is as completely cut off from
man and humanity as possible, the habit of burial aids in
this; until the Egos find again the free air in plants and
trees they are perhaps absolutely cut off, then they may, to
a certain grade, as far as plants and animals, the insects,
fishes and birds can do, recognize human activity, but for all
our purposes as true human beings they are cut off until they
enter again a human body, become part of it.

How about the spiritists (also called spiritualists)? In all
his eager search the author has found not one grain of even
decent evidence in favor of their specific contention; their
performances are dreams and waves of phases of Pantheos
of the Past combined with inost selfish acts. The best was
one evidently very sincere bright medium, claiming to call
the spirit of Faraday, — died 1882. I was permitted to put
questions. Being assured by "the spirit of Faraday*^ that
he now ^Tcnew everything,^^ I asked: ^^Why is the solar
line D double?^' A jumble of most silly generalities was the

146

answer. I suspected that "the spirit of Faraday^' did not
know all, and as an unfair trick said: "You know, Mr. Fara-
day, the D line is that of Magnesium.^^ And "the spirit of
Faraday^' fell into the vulgar trap most ridiculously in an
answer like: "Yes, it is because Magnesium is an element
with two poles.^^ The D line does not belong to Magnesium
but to Sodium! ! ! Poor Faraday as a spirit did not only
not know all but had even forgotten a most elementary
physical information. Sincerity of belief is not the slight-
est proof of truth of the object of the belief.

How does this Ego theory aflFect our actions near
death? As an example, the Pantheist who has given
while alive the greatest care to full, harmonious
development of his Egos, has found the present ex-
istence as John Doe good, but not of sufficient breadth,
desires to improve himself the next time, he would
like to be Jane Doe, to experience the fate of a woman;
he will hasten the reappearance of his Egos by allowing
rapid decay of his body; as he does not care to be John
(the body) again, his Ego of the Soul (Doe) may separate
from that of the body; he may even have his body cre-
mated and the ashes put into a garden; the chances are
better of again entering a human being than if he had his
body sealed up in lead or stone. In course of time a girl
baby is bom to Mr. and Mrs. Tom Doe; the Ego of . its. sojal
"Doe" is that of the late John Doe; Doe feels, the existence,
but not being connected with his former Ego of the body,
having passed through such a flood of intramolecular changes
since he died as John Doe, having most important of all in
the brain of little Jane Doe an Apparatus entirely unsuited
to reproduce the thoughts of the former John Doe, he can-
not recall his former appearance. His Ego of the Soul lives
as if it was the first time, simply from lack of proper recall-
ing facilities. Jane Doe grows to womanhood; she meets
John Clark. What a handsome man! She falls into a per-
fect infatuation of love. John Clark has a freckled face, a
pug nose, blear eyes, and red hair. No matter, "what a
handsome fellow this John Clark," says Jane Doe. The
Ego of Doe in her brain has not the means of recognizing
and telling her that John Clark in his body has the John
Ego of the body of the late John Doe, but instinctively she

147

recognizes the fact. They marry, a child is born. Mrs.
Jane Clark, nee Doe, says: it don't resemble my husband at
all. The Ego of the late John Doe in her brains has not
the apparatus to tell her — "Why, that resembles the late
John Doe.'' The child received the Ego of the body from
that of John Clark, but his Ego of the soul seems a differ-
ent one; as he grows up the parents say: What a brilliant
youngster, where did he get it from? Jane Clark nee Doe
never noticed it that, in eating, she swallowed an Ego of the
Soul folraerly in a man like Shakespeare. But, while the
boy is brilliant, hfe is educated as a physician, becomes fa-
mous as a writer. on problems of medicine and only by that
shows his impulses from his Ego of a Shakespeare. Then,
when Jane Clark dies she hopes to be in a Catholic heaven;
the Ego of the Soul of John Doe has to take that along;
it is one of his experiences, it wanders about after death,
finds nothing to answer to that hope, slowly intramolecular
changes inake that hope dimmer and dimmer until in about
say five hundred^ thousand years the Ego of John Doe, then
Mf^'J&he Clark, giVfes up the search and takes his normal
'i6iiarices; it enters a swallow; the brain apparatus there is
■ still mu<»h less suited^ to recognize former conditions. After
the lapse of many'&ges thie Ego of Doe meets a strange
Ego of John; through the mass t)f later accretions art aiRnity
'i« shown/ theyi'recogniae ' each other. With a 'John! — ^Doe!
the' aiiciefit "Egok rtish together- and John Doe exists again
■M 800^000,000,000 A. D. What a flood of experiences, im-
'provements to narrate, what= an immense store of added
kiiowled^e to prolong that life even beyond ten- thousand
years with a. possibility of establishing methods by which
in the future 'they may recognize each other at any time.
Then will humanity be only one soul in the Pantheos of
Humanity, because all its constituent Egos have all been in
all people. ''^

148

XIIL
SUICIDE.

A deeply significant act. The author has heard shallow
philosophers, professors at universities, declaim that it was
suicide that was the most distinctly human act. Since then
he has become convinced the dogs in their grief not infre-
quently commit suicide, that certain spiders, w^sps and
snakes always commit suicide when captured, and that even
other animals commit in certain cases acts which must be
considered as suicide.

To commit suicide, an impulse from the Egos of our
Souls or the Egos of our Bodies or the combined ones must
issue which, counteracting all other impulses, leads to the
act of self destruction. This act of self destruction may be
impelled from the Ego of the Soul or that of the Body or the
combination. It implies that at that given moment the de-
sire of being a human being is weaker than that of being
separate Egos outside of the human body.

It may be said that in the first place human society, its
laws and apparent injustices are the most potent nearest
causey of suicide. Among savages it is extremely 'rare, only
one case among two hundred and fifty thousand Indians in
five years (Chaska, May 4, 1898). But it is strange that
there should appear certain laws of frequency in suicide.
If it was an act of absolutely "free will" how could there
be such laws? We quote from a reliable paper with all its
unfair, shallow views:

"The average annual suicide rate per one hundred thous-
and population in various countries is: Saxony, Sl\; Den-
mark, 25.8; Austria, 21.2; Switzerland, 20.2; United States,
19.2; France, 15.7; German Empire, 14.3; Hanover, 14;
Sweden, 14; Norway, 12.5; Queensland, 13.5; Prussia, 13.3;
Victoria, 11.5; New South Wales, 9.3; Bavaria, 9.1; New Zea-
land, 9; South Australia, 8.9; Belgium, 6.9; England and
Wales, 6.9; Tasmania, 5.3; Hungary, 5.2; Scotland, 4; Italy,

149

3.7; Netherlands, 3.6; Kussia, 2.9; Ireland, 1.7; and Spain,
1.4.

"The average per one hundred thousand population is
much greater in the cities than in town and country life.
For instance, in Dresden it is 51; Chicago, 46; Paris, 42; Ber-
lin, 36; Ctenoa, 31; Stockholm, 27; Christiana, 25; Lyons,
29; yienna, 28; London, 23; Brussels, 15; Moscow, 11; Ge-
neva, 11; Rome, 8; St. Petersburg, 7; Milan, 6; Constenti-
nople, 12; Madrid, 3; and Lisbon, 2.

"The causes leading to suicide have been variously as-
signed, but the following based on actual reports per one
hundred cases may be regarded as reliable: In European
countries the record shows that 19 per cent was due to vice
and crime; 18 per cent to madness and delirium; 14 per
cent to loss of intellect; 11 per cent to alcoholism; 6 per cent
to moral sufferings; 4 per cent to family matters; 4 per cent
to poverty and want; 3 per cent to consequence of crime;
2 per cent to disease, and 19 per cent to unknown causes.
In the United States the causes run about the same, except
that insanity leads the list. It is also shown that double
the number of suicides are committed during the daytime,
and that June is the favorite month, and the 11th the
favorite day.^*

Suicides occur with such regularity that a statistician
could reasonably predict, considering the natural increase,
that, e. g., in the year 1930 there will be 1,040 suicides in
Chicago, of which 140 will be in July (population then about
2,000,000).

How is such statistical regularity compatible with a true
free will? The truth is that an absolutely free will is as un-
known as absolute freedom is in any other aspect of occur-
rences of our world. The will of man is merely the re-
sultant impulse composed of innumerable prior and preced-
ing impulses, and as those were received by man with or
even against his wish, the resultant will bear the same char-
acteristic; only very superficial philosophy talks of the "free
will" of man. Because I can, when challenged, raise or
lower my arm to show my "free will'* is no proof at all
of a free will, it merely shows a will or tendency of impulse,
but not at all a free one; for, when analyzed, it will be
found in every case that there existed a reason for .raising

150

one or the other arm or not raising either, and as soon as a
reason exists my will is not free; that reason points out
the force that determined my will; in fact, this reason is the
ganglion impulse commanding the act. Hence apparent
free will may be found among lunatics who act without ap-
parent reason, but not in sane human beings or animals.

If man has a free will so has the dog; what else but his
free will makes him wag his tail at his master and not at a
stranger? Is the dog a wound up mechanism which, on
man "touching the button,^^ wags, and is man no such
wound up machine? A man sees his sweetheart at a dis-
tance, he smiles (ialthough she cannot See the smile), he
walks to meet her, etc.; were both such wound up mechan-
isms, if the dog waa one, or have all three — dog, man and
sweetheart — free wills, or none?

Suicide might logically be classified as due to three
causes:

Desire of Ego of Soul (Doe) to separate from Ego of Body
(John).

Desire of Ego of Body (John) to separate from Ego of
Soul (Doe).

Desire of united Egos to break up the temporary shape
of John Doe.

To the first cause many ascribed suicides in religious
mania, insanity.

To the second cause suicides because of disease, pain, old
age (in 1898 a man of 97 years committed suicide).

To the third cause suicides because of love, financial re-
verses or other failures or disappointments.

What becomes of the suicide after d^ath?

If suicide was from the first cause death may not bring
about the separation of the Egos, and the Egos of the sui-
cide may have to pass through the ages together, until an-
other body is formed by them under practicable conditions.
In the second case it varies nothing from natural death ex-
cept for the loss of the knowledge of "natural death" and
consequent difficulty of dying a natural death the next time.

The third cause may be the one fullest of. disagreeable
future consequences. In the person committing suicide for
love both his Egos impress each other that only a certain
being is fit to be the mother or father of his or her chil-

151

dren, and it will be a long chase through futurity until that
most improbable aim can be realized. It may even be said
the suicide for love would stand a much better chance of
possessing the object of his passion if he waited till his
natural death came. How many married people lose their
mates by death and remarry happily. His chance may be
right here, nothing human is an impossibility to a human
being. At the same time, suicide for love partakes to a
certain grade of heroism and this may in the future facilitate
the task for him of finding his beloved; it may even be that
such heroic Egos retain much of their vigor; however, the
rhythm of life is broken, he dies now, his beloved may die
years after him. In the next reappearance he may be a
being thousands of miles distant from her; a truly heroic
Ego is needed to continue the search and carry it to success;
even now some of us may be former suicides from love
searching for our ideals.

The man who commits suicide, e. g., for financial re-
verses seems to be unfortunate. Does his death pay his
debts? Does his death provide for his family? Even if by
suicide he makes the life insurance payable to his wife and
creditors and does therefore to a certain degree a ^Tieroical"
act, is he not indebted to the life insurance company for
the amount? Money represents labor, skill, the part of
somebody^s life, hence by his suicide he, so to speak, pledges
a share of his future life in the satisfaction of his debt to the
company. Is not the harder course always the more heroi-
cal? Which is harder, to plod in declining years, declin-
ing health, among few friends, adverse "luck'' towards the
extinguishment of an honorable debt, which is nothing but
parts of other human lives received by us and used by us,
or to pull for one-tenth of a second the trigger of a revolver?
The suicide for business reverses enters futurity with a bal-
ance upon the wrong side of his ledger. This will have to
be wiped out before prosperity will return to him. Now we
know what will satisfy that debt in this life. Do we know
what will do it in the next summation life-day?

Is the act of suicide in itself a "crime," or an act arous-
ing the wrath of God? If we belong to Jehovah, it may
arouse Jehovah's wrath, whatever that may mean; if we be-
long to Brama, he will not count it against us; if we belong

152

to none of these ancient declining phases of Pantheos, but
to that of the natural growing Pantheos of our own human
and individual development, we will suffer the natural back-
action of our action regardless of "crime" or "virtue/* They
are punishment enough.

No man commits suicide unless a majority of powerful
phases of Pantheos working to his destruction predominates
over those preserving him; hence the suicide act is merely
the resultant of many phases of Pantheos and as such may
be said to be as neutral as any pure resultant; it is only
important as to future probabilities and past connections.

MISS FKANCES E. WILLAKD.

Her case offers such most curious problems and views that
it deserves a little philosophy. She died in 1898 as Presi-
dent of W. C. T. IJ. (the Woman^s Christian Temperance
Union). As we do not write only for people in the United
States, but if it please Destiny, also for others, we would
say these mystic letters mean an association of women to
advocate in a spirit and on the base of Christianity total
abstinence from alcoholic liquors. Hence the title is on its
face a lie, to say it without circumlocution, because temper-
ance does not mean total abstinence; it is as far from it as
drunkenness, no matter what local odor may have been
given to the word. But the society went much further.
It had and has to the philosopher but one redeeming trait:
zeal; all the rest was and is barbaric, medieval, despotic, ut-
terly illiberal, superstitious, narrow minded, even frequently
hypocritical, sophistic and reactionary; even its movements
in favor of women were and are not for equal rights with
men, but for more rights than those of men.* In no state
was or is an illiberal law, be it about marriage, or divorce,
drinking or eating, habits of living or dying even suggested

♦We beg not to consider the words as opprobrla, but used entirely
in their dictionary senses; we only state our honest convictions.

153

without its getting immediately the approval and help of
this W. C. T. U. For twenty years has the author followed
the course of this utterly and aggressively reactionary so-
ciety and in not a single instance, except that of raising the
age of consent of young females, has he found the society
on the side of justice and liberty. The members know that,
as females, they enjoy already before American courts quite
incredible privileges over the males; and have tried and are
trying to add more to them without in the least relinquish-
ing any of the numerous privileges granted by chivalry,
which is nothing but the hypocritical conduct of any male
animal towards a female from whom he expects favors.

This society — ^so much for our foreign readers — ^takes the
stand that the less men spend for drinks or any other amuse-
ment the more money have they left to give to their wives
and children, if per rare chance there should be any, for
there goes decidedly a strain through the society that child-
bearing is a gross injustice against women, hence to be
avoided as much as possible. The society has never made
any crusade against the sale of syringes, although they kill
more children than were ever born. If the crusade against
the excessive drinking habit was an unselfish one, such as
inaugurated by Mr. F. Murphy and other men among men,
or women among women only, not the slighest trace of dis-
approval, nay, even the highest approval could be given.

But the society arrays women against men; if it
succeeds the end of the race is not far off; for,
with all its skill and zeal, the society will never
transfer to men the duty of childbearing, but will make
women so unwilling to endure this unquestionable hardship
that births will fall below deaths and a slow dying out of a
certain class will result. This has already been realized',
e. g., in Boston, a stronghold of the W. C. T. U. The mem-
bers of this union are all orthodox Protestants, hardly a
Catholic among a thousand in their fold. Thirty years ago
Boston was a city two-thirds Protestant, to-day the Protest-
ants are already in the minority, not so much by immigra-
tion, but because the rate of children in Protestant, W. C.
T. IJ. infected, families is loss than 0.7 per adult female,
while in Catholic families it is 1.4; the difference between
these two figures represents a gain of one hundred thousand

154

for the Catholics in thirty years. In a similar manner is
its influence exerted over the entire Anglo-Protestant part
of the United States, and in probably one hundred years
will the United States, if not other factors step in to inter-
fere, contain at least ten almost entirely Catholic states
(Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire,
New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Rhode
Island, etc.). One conspicuous trend of the influence of the
society is to make women dissatisfied with being women, to
miake them consider all amusements of men as only so much
loss to their financial resources and allowances, to make
them over finical in the choice of husbands, preferring a state
of old-maid-nefis to the danger of even a. temperate ,
"drinker,^^ because their peculiar logic confounds every tem-
perate drinker with a drunkard, totally oblivious of the fact
that out of lOO men who drink only 2 or 3 at the
most ever become "drunkards." . Of course, a shrew
may nag a moderate drinker into becoming a drunkard.
Another very baneful effect of the society is the spread of
the use of opium and morphine among women. Since alco-
hol is so fearfully tabooed, the more insidious, easily coiir
cealable morphine has to take its place among women and
eighty per cent of them crave some kind of a stimulant
just like men. There would be little fault to find if mor-
phine, after about five or six years^ Use, did not lose its
power, had to be used in more and more increasing doses,
destroying entirely all sex and finally even the "nerves."
Probably a considerable percentage of the women under the
influence of the W. C. T. U. are morphine users. Where do
the 1,000,000 ounces of morphia sold annually in the
United States go? There are only about 4,000,000 people
sick for 25 days a year in the average; assuming
even one grain a day while they are so sick, would give only
100,000,000 grains, but one grain is a heavy dose,
more than average, and not one-third of the cases need or
use morphia, hence 50,000,000 grains is all that may be
used for legitimate cases; but 437,000,000 grains are
used annually, hence there must be at least 1,000,000
people using one grain a day the year round. Few
men are users. Can all the members of the W. C.
T. U. in the privacy of their homes deny that they use

155

it? An almost sure test of a morphine user is his great
personal dislike for alcohol; the two are antagonistic; un-
less the previous bias or education or youthful idiosyncrasies
explain this dislike, the presumption is that the person uses
morphine or opium. Very rarely will a male or female user
of morphine have children; the sexual desires are almost
entirely destroyed by the drug, when used long, and beyond
even as low as one-fourth grain a day taken internally. Hot
hypodermically; far more rapid is the destruction when used
hypodermically.

But again back to Miss Willard. Notice, in spite of what
is said of her loveliness of character, her name is not Mrs.
Willard. She made a remarkable codicil in ;her will,
desiring to see her body cremated. In conformity with it
her body was cremated April 16, 1898. Now, 909 out of
1,000 of the W. C. T. U. will have their bodies buried.
There is not the slighest doubt that the Ego of a body
cremated will follow an entirely different line of development
in the future from that of Egos of bodies buried. The
Ego of the soul may not be actually freed from that of the
body until both are set free either by microbes of decay
or the fire of the crematory; until that moment they may
sleep peacefully together in the, dead body. It is therefore
most unlikely that the Egos of Miss Willard will meet those
of the other members of the W. C. T. U., even at a period
when the latter are already meeting and again recognizing
each other; hers and theirs belong to an entirely different
cycle of developments from now on; only after the Earth
has fallen into the sun or by an internal eruption or con-
tact with another celestial body has been burnt up will those
now buried join in the cycle of those cremated. Hence,
Miss Willard took her chances beyond the life of our planet
as we now know it. She cast her lot, at least, as far as her
bodily Ego is concerned and probably also of the Ego of the
soul, with the millions who since the dawn of existence. were
burnt to death, cremated or destroyed as with Pompeii and
Herculamim, .^tna, Krakatoa. Of those who, in modern
times, had their bodies cremated nine-tenths were what are
called "infidels " but in India millions of (Hindoos, Budd-
hists) widows have died -on the pyre. Is Miss Willard com-
ing as a missionary of Jehovah among them when later they

156

reappear? She will meet there numerous and strong mis-
sionaries of Jupiter, Allah, Buddha, Wotan and Pantheos
pure. Or, will she, by taking such an unusual course for her
Egos, so entirely change herself that she will emerge in fu-
ture existence free from the dominion of Jehovah, of the en-
slaving principles of the W. C. T. U. and as a true woman
with many children realize that part of the true mission of
woman? Or did the Pantheos of Justice, in view of the great
injustice for which she fought, give this idea to her Egos to
work out their punishment in the second reappearance so that
in a third reappearance they are redeemed? Or still another
view: Is she seeking in the future for the Mr. Willard who
did not appear to her in this existence and whose Egos in a
form, consciously totally unrecognizable to her, influenced
her to take this course because he is following or preceding
on it? Or, is it the Destiny which, working towards Har-
monious Perfection through Laws and Brains beyond even
Harmonious Perfection, influenced this codicil? Of one
thing there seems to be little doubt, for the immediate
present and even the next future appearance, the Egos of
Body and Soul of Miss Willard, while not dead as far as they
themselves are concerned, are so far dehumanized and de-
prived of human consciousness that they must be considered
as dead for us until they have again assumed a shape recog-
nizable by us perhaps billions of years hence. There is still
another suggestion: Miss Willard may have been so dis-
gusted with being a woman that her Egos, who unconscious-
ly know infinitely more — like those of all of us — ^than con-
sciously, in order to reach a change of sex, have influenced
her to take the course of cremation through which, before
the Earth existed as it is now, all Egos had passed in the
Infinity of the Past. They perhaps know, although they
cannot tell, in a general way, that the deep mystery of sex
lies in temperatures beyond those of decay. In the illionth
future the cohorts of the W. C. T. U. will meet Miss Frances
Willard, perhaps to pass a resolution declaring the society
of no further purpose and dissolved, since Jehovah died in
8000 A. D., sixty-eight hundred years after the death of
Jupiter, and now in the year 52,000,000 of our Era Jehovah
may be sleeping his summation sleep to again awaken in

157

greater hannony with Buddha, Jupiter, etc., until they all
merge into the Pantheos phases beyond Humanity.

But, considering every philosophical aspect, the will of
Miss Willard to have her body cremated must be classed as
an exhibition of heroic faith in the future and heroic cour-
age fully worthy of that of the most heroic soldier on the
field of battle. Full respect to the hero of the future, how-
ever much we may regret the despot of the past and her
influence in life!

XV.
MIGRATION OF SOULS AND DREAMS.

If we seem to repeat a previous chapter the reader may
pardon; it is merely an attempt of reaching from another
point of view similar conclusions.

Some religions, especially Buddhism, suppose a migration
of the souls. On the face of it this appears a deeper religion
than Christianity. Is it? We do not assume competency to
answer conclusively; for ourselves we incline to that view.

The Buddhist form of the migration is a hypothesis; it is
as yet not a theory, because a theory is made after the ex-
periments upon which it is founded; a hypothesis is merely
a suggestion of a line of thought to be proved or disproved
by experiments or logic. It seems a purely logical deduc-
tion and in its pure form deprived of the silly platitudes,
natural among common vulgar people to express a great
truth. Only we cannot consider as probably the relatively
frequent migrations; it seems even more probable that, since
perhaps 10,000 years no human being has appeared as a per-
fect reproduction with the same Egos of Soul and Body.
The fear of Buddhists of hurting a relative in killing an
animal is very refined, but probably not well founded; man
has the right to kill animals for his use or defense, but not
for sport; for the pleasure of sport the Pantheos of the
Earth will exact pain from the hunter.

Admitting for a moment that soul and body are dis-
tinctive elements or components of man, can either exist
without the other? The body seems to be able to do so to a

158

certain extent; the numerous cases of absolute imbeciles
would show either the union of a human body with an ani-
mal soul, or a body "running itself" without soul. Un-
fortunately the transition from the lowest imbecile to the
highest intellect is so gradual that no sharp demarkation line
can be drawn and, therefore, we are forced either to abandon
the distinctive soul or to suppose that in the case of the
imbecile the soul made, so to speak, a poor connection in
the brain, not having become sufficiently incorporated, only
attached in a haphazard manner. There may even be simi-
lar differences in souls as in bodies so that a strong soul may
reside in a weak body or the reverse. At any rate, many
phenomena are easier of explanation to-day under the sup-
position of a distinctive auto-existing soul. What is this
soul? Is it the Ego, the I, in I am, I do, I sleep, I live,
I die? To analyze it let us suppose our lenses gradually
dying. We lose our eyesight, is the Ego left? . Most as-
suredly that of the soul is left. We lose our hearing and
eyesight, but still the Ego of the soul is there, only that of
ihebody is a little weak. Wie lose sight, hearing, taste and
«tnell, feeling, language and motion. Imagine it well!
Are the Egos still there? That of the soul is still there, that
of the body is gQne. I certainly cannot say that my Ego of
the body survives the loss of more than three senses, particu-
larly, that of the general bodily feeling. That seems to be
ithe most important vital sense, much more so than sight,
hearing, taste, smell and language together. As soon as that
.sense departs we seem asleep, and sleep is the temporary
death of the Egos.

Rudyard Kipling in some of his sketches where he is more
the deep philosopher and less the buffoon has described
«ome vague Buddhist-like recollections most delicio^sly.
The London clerk who dimly dreamt he was a Galley slave,
a Norman warrior then and as a free (?) man, falls in love
with a very commonplace female, when all his dream van-
ishes, it is one of the most charming little sketchies the au-
thor ever read. There is a deep philosophy in it. Can man
imagine, think or dream anything odder, deepef or even
more unreal than the r^l happenings? Truth 4s evej much
stranger than fiction. If the present Ego of my soul in
.company with the present historic Ego of my body, forms

159

the mab, cannot each of them have dim memories of for-
mer existences? The Ego of my body may have been in
many others, that of my soul combined with different ones.
Are not some of those strange dreams imperfect attempts of
as yet not fully developed childish Egos to picture to each
other former experiences? In one dream of the author — a
pure dream devoid of all elements of nightmare or illusion —
recurs constantly a city which has come up so frequently
that the author recognizes its streets, special houses; they
are a European type of the tenth century; yet he never
saw such a city; awake he cannot even recall it, but in
dream existence he recognizes it oddly as: "Why, this is
my dream (!) city." Is it not an attempt of one of the Egos
of his individuality to depict something to the other and to
him? Is it not trying to connect him with something real
of which a faint impression is left? Is the Ego of his body
trying to tell something extremely curious to the Ego of the
soul? Is a dream of that kind, so to speak, a social chat
about former times between the two Egos?

Some dreams may have an even deeper meaning. The
author will relate one and let the reader explain: I, was, in
my dream, in a western American mining camp with certain
scenery, very flat and unattractiv^: and was struck down by
a man in miner's dress who, on closer inspection, turned
out' to resemble myself very much, although not strong
enough to make me positive it was myself. That was tRe
dream,, omitting unessential details. At that time I had
planned to go into a mining venture, and about six weeks
after the dream I left. My idea of the mining country was
then one of beautiful scenery in spite of that dream which
showed it a desolate place^ In going from a certain city to
my mine, all at once I thought I knew that scenery, — ^yes,
it was the scenery of my dream, not accurately depicted, but
aa well as I could remember quite closely, an uninteresting,
high sterile hill land, and as it turned out^ my innate weak
qualities caused a failure of that venture. Jt was I myself
who had struck myself down as the dream showed. That
the dream should show the failure of my venture by my
own weak qualities, — love of detail, excessive love of per-
sonal work, dislike of personal contact with, people^ dislike
of allowing anybody to do anything which I can possibly do

160

myself, positively envying them the work, dislike of finance,
contempt for money itself and lack of desire of possessing
money — and therefore employing a treasurer who turned out
dishonest — ^was nothing astounding, the mining venture was
in my mind at the time and my Egos knew my own weak-
ness perfectly and could foretell or rather figure in advance
the result, but that the scene should be located so reasonably
correct, when my general idea of the land was that of
beautiful sceneries, is to me the most marvellous thing that
ever happened in my life within my own brain.

It is strange that popular notion from the times of the
mythical Joseph in Egypt to our days has given great im-
portance to dreams. Even to-day dream books are sold and,
in truly free countries where gambling is considered as
legitimate a pastime as praying, they play a great role in lot-
teries, tombola, policy, etc.

A proper view of a dream shows that they have signifi-
cance and, if properly interpreted, may be most valuable
helps to man in his care of body and soul, but this sig-
nificance does not go beyond the body or soul of the
dreamer.

Dreams as pure dreams are well distinguished from night-
mares; the latter are much nearer to insanity than dreams.
In dreams we may suppose that the Egos alone are play-
ing, but the observations by means of the symograph show-
ing that during dreams much more blood goes into the
brain than in normal sleep, seem to show that larger areas
of the brain are active in dreams than the mere Ego centers.
Hence dreams become more nearly thoughts, nerve actions
and deeds cut off from the nerves of execution (muscles).
Dreams are acts of the ends of the nerves in the brain lead-
ing to the proper muscles, but by the ganglia of the body
disconnected from them. Nightmares involve a degree of
consciousness more advanced than dreams. Thus the author
in coming out of a certain nightmare had to use, as it seemed
once, three stages of efforts of awakening, each accompanied
by a lesser degree of nightmare until fully awake; at the
second stage of awakening he must have opened his eyes, be-
cause the dim flame of the night lamp was visible, to become
dark again, followed by a more life-like nightmare; at the
third effort the din of a crowd at his doors (as the night-

161

mare depicted) was still very clear, although he saw the
night lamp clearly until, all at once, all was silent and he
fully awake. Nightmares seem to derive their origin from
several causes: Sleeping on the back with the arras turned
back over the head seems to be one; irregularity of intes-
tines with tendency towards summer complaint a second
one; absorption of certain poisons produced by certain intes-
tinal microbes and their effect the third and a very common
one. The latter cause the author has traced very clearly in
his case; it assumes precisely the wavelike stages of, e. g.,
taking ether. If ether is inhaled the effect is a succession
of ups and downs of nervous excitement, very much as if,
e. g., all the loops of a net of rubber strings were all at once
drawn tight, then again by their elasticity they would ex-
pand only to be again drawn tight, etc. With every tight-
ening of the loop comes a period of intensity of brain action,
with every relaxation one of depression, fatigue, uncon-
sciousness. In the application of ether at least twenty such
rhythms have been counted before complete insensibility ar-
rives; this insensibility may be at the height of a concentra-
tion (nitrous oxide) or of relaxation (chloroform). Our in-
testines are filled with millions each of many species of bac-
teria and microbes; we could not digest without them; certain
ones produce products, even in healthy people, that are pois-
on to all beings but man and apes; but products also pois-
onous to man are produced in diseases (ptomaines, like ty-
photoxicon, etc.), and it is the absorption of such which
seems, to the author, the most common cause of nightmares,
and even of dreams. Certain chronic intestinal diseases
result in pockets forming in the intestines, where colonies of
these minor poison-producing microbes thrive; from time to
time they become unusually active, and their products ab-
sorbed produce that intoxication called nightmares and partly
dreams. When this continues into wakefulness, insanity
appears; the insanity from a brain abscess is the intoxica-
tion by the waste products of the micrococcus aureus, or pro-
digious or similar ones, which reach the brain before they
have a chance to be eliminated by the spleen, liver, or kid-
neys; of course, the mechanical destruction of brain areas,
by a disease, ruins that area, but the balance of the brain is
affected by poisons from such colonies of microbes. Hence,
ii

162

dreams have almost solely significance as indicating some-
thing abnormal in some part of the body. Thus the falling
sensation is a wrong interpretation of the passage of food
through certain valves within the intestines (valvula Bau-
liini); while it is passing we fall, when it has passed we land.
The particular character of a particular dream depends on
the degree to which certain portions in the brain are tired,
cultivated, asleep, etc.

"Dreams go by contraries" is an old saying, and true; sim-
ply because dreams are all the wrong interpretation which our
brain puts on imperfectly received notices from organs, hence
cannot fail to be wrong. • Everybody can find out for himself
that if he dreams e. g. of beautiful castles, it means pills of
calomel and aloes; if he dreams of swimming in warm water,
that he had better have his lungs examined, or has too heavy
bed clothes; if he dreams of meeting ancestors^ father,
mother, etc., usually a mild disease of the lower intestines
is present. The character of a nightmare, in particular,
has almost solely the significance that a certain organ is in
distress, but cannot, so to speak, communicate with the
center of consciousness directly, the cable being shunted
out. Thus, the author observed that a nightmare in which
he found his enemies assailing him, and defending himself
with his fists, but only made the enemies laugh at the in-
effectiveness of the blows, was invariably caused by a dream
while the arm was doubled up in a cramped position and
^'asleep," i. e., deprived of proper nerve supply. Even while
we are awake, arms, legs, etc., may become asleep, owing to
odd pressure on the nerves; even in sleep the author has not
infrequently observed this "sleep within sleep" falling asleep
of organs, always accompanied by appropriate nightmares.
Not only our limbs, even areas of skin nerves may become
asleep, e. g. one side of the face, owing to pressure on the
so-called seventh facial nerve; even muscles in the back, the
chest, etc., may become benumbed; and if that happens dur-
ing sleep on a hard, uncomfortable, wrinkled cot, appropriate
nightmares are sure to follow; in one of them the author
fancied that he had crawled through a key-hole; when half
through, the front and rear end of the body swelled to nor-
mal proportions, and there he was stuck. It was a numbness
of the diaphragm which caused the sensation. Dreams that

163

curiously seem to come true, may, as above related, occur
once or twice in everybody's life. But have we ever care-
fully kept track of those that did not? Too frequently peo-
ple overlook 1,000 failures and keep only one apparent suc-
cess in mind. Thus, when a youth, on a certain morning,
the author was aroused by a violent knocking at his door at
•day-break. On arising and opening the door, he found three
policemen, a surgeon, stretcher, and other pleasant appur-
tenances of a violent death, greatly disappointed at his hav-
ing the presumption of being alive. Upon being questioned,
they explained that a lady had sent to them a hurry call,
because *he was sure that at a certain room, and number,
a young man had been almost killed by robbers. The author
visited the kind lady and found that nearly every day she
had some similar "premonitory, dream.'^ Although she had
•only two coincidences to show, she kept the police busy, and
actually thought it a conspiracy of the police to deprive her of
her just glory, to belittle all her finds, when the police trans-
formed her dream-conflagration into a night lamp, her
dream-cry of murder into a snore, her dream-outrage on mod-
esty into a kiss between lovers, etc. During the absence of
one of her boys in war a kind mother had nightmares every
night; one night she saw hfm with a cannon ball in his
breast, another night with a saber cut dividing his body in
halves, another night with his limbs flying in all directions,
every day the soldier received a letter beginning: "I am
afraid this letter will not find you any more among the living,
because I dreamt," etc. But the boy came back from twenty
battles without a scratch, and without curing his mother
from her divinatory dreams.

The dream-cronies in countries with lotteries are, of
course, nothing but the same class of females which, under the
name of mediums, clairvoyants, healers, etc., parasite, es-
pecially in the United States most extensively. That all
those dream-cronies are poor seems to have no eflfect on the
ignorant masses, while logically it might be supposed that
they themselves, if they had any higher information, would
be the first to profit by it.

It is true that frequently, in dreams, we remember things
which we would hardly recall while awake; thus the author
remembers in one dream he read off the list of his university

164

classmatea, some eighty, from A to Z, who had graduated
with him, and apparently correctly; although awake he can
only remember about four; but this is nothing astonishing or
new; it is merely old knowledge stored in a part of the brain
now out of use; only a few useful hints have come to him in
dreams, not nearly of the same quality as those received while
awake. We must never lose sight of the truth that no im-
pression on our eyes, ears or senses is ever lost; it is always
stored in our brains, only not always in a form that can be
consciously or easily recalled. Especially the older an im-
pression, the more remote from at present vital subjects, the
more easily will it come up in dreamland, because those
cells and areas, now little used, do not become as tired, and
therefore, deeply asleep, as those extensively used in our
daily life. Thus, it happens that a business man rarely
dreams of his business, but frequently of his youth, his par-
ents, friends, etc.

XVI.
ANIMALS AND PLANTS.

According to the Jehovah mythology animals are older
than man and, of a radically different type by the Mosaic
hypothesis of creation, of the same type according to the
Ecclesiast, one of the ancient contributors to the Bible.

According to best scientific logic all, man, animals, and
plants, are of equal age, namely, from the illionity of the
past. We cannot define where man begins and animal ends
in history, although to-day this distinction is clearly marked.
When the chimpanzee, orang and gorilla species became dif-
ferentiated from man, their common ancestors consisted of
thousands and thousands of generations gradually diflfering
more and more. To-day we cannot declare a hairy man to
be an animal, or a chimpanzee, with red hair, to be a man,
but it was precisely such petty differences, spreading more
and more, from generation to generation, that finally, in their
sum total, gave the difference of the two species. The gradual
transitions from the most wide apart organisms are so numer-
ous that, while we can tell the difference between an oak
tree and a turtle dove, this difference entirely disappears
when we follow both down to the egg and both through the
ages to the lowest petref act. Even at the egg, before the acorn

165

is formed or the pigeon's egg is laid, all our science gives
out; they are identical at a certain stage of earliest devel-
opment for our present apparatus of perception.

Hence, it is not to be wondered that every trait of man is
found in animals in a gradually vanishing form as we come
further and further away from the present representatives.

Eeligion, love, friendship, envy, jealousy, every form of
passion is present in all animals, and some even in plants.
The mimosa pudica, a tree furnishing us the gum arabic, is
more sensitive to foreign touch than the shyest maiden; it
may be said to be extremely bashful; bashfulness is only an
exaggerated, ridiculous form of the "virtue" of purity; the
leaves may be beaten against each other by the wind, sand
may be hurled against them, rain, and some insects, may fall
on them without effect, but let a warm blooded animal, like
man, touch them and they close. This closing upon contact
is a crude, archaic form of shrinking modesty, here used to
protect the leaves against mammals. Dogs have a feeling of
religion towards their masters. No Jew ever worshipped Je-
hovah as a dog does his master. Even ceremonies are ex-
tremely common among animals; one has only to watch
roosters, pigeons, pea-fowls, turkeys, horses, cats, even flies,
ants, etc., to observe numerous curious acts not explicabhi
under any hypothesis, except simple ceremonies of conduct.
Many animals even exceed man in family care and familj'
affection; for genuine patriotism an ant hill or, stil\ better,
a colony of termites, bees, wasps, even a swarm of humming
birds, will match any valor man can display. Even individual
valor of a complex type is frequently displayed in animals,
Brehm, a most reliable African explorer, tells the fol-
lowing story: His party met a troop of Abyssinian
baboons, a species which has a fairly good tribal or-
ganization. The baboons retreated across a creek, but
one young fellow, evidently bewildered, stopped at a
rock in front of the creek and was soon surrounded
by the dogs of the expedition. He cried for help and
the troop of baboons, on the other side, held a council, with
great noise; one of the largest males advanced, recrossed the
creek, overawed the dogs, took off the young baboon from
the rock and with him crossed over to the rest of them. His
conduct appeared to the dogs, evidently so man-like, that, in

166

sheer astonishment, they stepped aside, allowing the fierce
warrior to claim a bloodless victory. The party, which did
not consist of English people, allowed the brave old veteran
to complete his triumph without killing him for no other pur-
pose than killing.

In the early part of the century the question: "Instinct or
reason?'' was the headline in periodicals of thousands of
stories, proving intellect in animals, sometimes, of no mean
grade. While common people, since Aristotle, never had
doubted that animals had intellect,-T-just ask a hostler
about his horses — the introduction of the bible and priest
sophistry had established somewhat a notion among semi-
scientific classes as if animals had only an instinct, a dim,
vague, wound-up spring which, slowly unwinding, constitu-
ted the life of the animal, while man had no such instinct,
but a "free will." The priests needed the "free will" for the
purposes of their Jehovah so that he, a God, nay, even the
highest God, by their hypothesis, could plan a cunningly
devised temptation, a "stumbling block" as the bible calls it,
in dozens of passages; poor, little, weak man used his "free
will" wrong, when met by the divinely contrived temptation,
and Jehovah had an excellent excuse for becoming exceed-
ingly wrathy, requiring, of course, the offices of the priests,
at seventy-five cents a mass, to be again propitiated and
calmed down.

To-day, it is well admitted that both man and animals
have instinct and reason and limited "free will," Instinct is
the inherited reason as applied to special acts, reason the
stock of impulses left after instinct is satisfied, to be ap-
plied to cases of present occurrences calling for their uses.
Hence, instinct and reason both supply nerve impulses for
action, but the first only relates to the mechanicity of the
action, the latter regulates the first according to the report
from the senses.

In instinct a certain ganglion is, so to speak, set for a cer-
tain capacity of impressions; as soon as that capacity is
reached, it acts and performs its proper nerve impulses; in
reason the ganglia are not fixedly set, but made to act only
in conformity to the various impressions upon the brain
during the animal's and man's life; or, reasonable acts come
from ganglia of impulse whose machinery is not set by the

167

parents and set for a specific act, but who become loaded
for action, so to speak, by the individual (animal or man)
itself. Thus, the child feels the nipple between its lips, — sl
finger, pencil, key, etc., will answer just as well — as soon as
that feeling is experienced, a ganglion starts the action of
sucking. This is thoroughly an instinctive act. A calf will
fill itself from a rubber nipple, connected by a hose and a
barrel of warm water, with this warm water up to the dan-
ger point of bursting. It is herein a simple sucking ma-
chine, a pump. A pump with its valves and parts is a
machine acting by instinct; the builder furnished the parts
and his ganglia their co-operation, which transferred to the
pump — ^inherited by the pump — became the instinct of the
pump; but the instinct won't start the pump, something
more vital need be furnished in addition, even some reason or
intelligence. Exactly the same with a baby; it may have the
most splendid suckling instinct, unless it is furnished with
proper supplies the instinct cannot tell it how to get it, not
any more than to the pump where to draw water from.
Every animal and man, to live, must have instinct, which
is, so to speak, the mechanical arrangement for suitable
working together of muscles; and reason, which is the di-,
recting impulse depending on the experiences of the present
life and existence of the individual. In this sense instinct
and reason both have their sphere and are not opposite each
other, but subsequent. An animal could not any more live
by instinct alone than man could live by reason alone. E6a-
son has to be educated to guide and set in motion the in-
stinct. While reason is dormant (babyhood), somebody's else
reason has to direct the child's instinct. In some animals,
instinct seems to be much further developed than in man,
that is to say, it extends to acts which man might do from
impulses of reason preceding the instinct. Thus, young,
blind warrior ants seize any object aggressively which comes
into the reach of their jaws, and this blind instinct stays
with them through life. That instinct in animals is only
an inherited ability to act in a historically fixed but not in
any case is proved by our ability to poison animals. If in-
stinct was a kind of blind power or mechanical reason given
to animals, which, so to speak, tells them what is good for
them and what not, it would tell them that certain things

168

are poison, but nothing of the kind occurs, not any more than

in man.

If animals and man lived always in exactly the same sur-
roundings as their parents, their acts might become, in time,
all instinctive or mechanical, because, upon seeing, smelling,
feeling, certain objects, certain acts would always have to
be done, and through thousands of generations would be-
come gradually hereditary; but no animal ever sees a single
object identical with any other; an ant in an ant hill picks
up gravel and carries it to the surface, not on^ grain is
identical with the other; sometimes it rains, then the sun
shines, hot winds and dew affect the ant hill, hence these
little differences necessitate a reason, which is an adjusta-
ble instinct, to apply the instinct to them. A dredging ma-
chine, e. g., has the sole instinct of picking up soft mud; if a
large rock is encountered the machine does not know what to
do except get out of order; reason somewhere has to guide the
instinct of that machine. In animals we can even frequently
read the thoughts and the reason in a certain act. A very
pretty act from a common street cur, witnessed by us, was
this: The cur, a mongrel of pug — yellow dog — ^nondescript,
made no human friends in the block, but attached himself
to another equally disreputable cur, which had found favor
with a saloon keeper; he was as friendly to the boss-dog as
usually a dog is to a man. One morning, we noticed this cur
busy on a nice bone about 200 yards from his usual haunt^
All at once he stopped gnawing, wagged his tail at no ^^^^3^
particular, took the bone in his mouth, a la cigar, and """^^^^^^q
to the home of his dog-master. With many protestaU ^^
of friendship he laid the bone before the other dog, "^^^^^^e
his devotion to him, and was "tickled to death'^ Avlaeti ^^
latter accepted it, wagged a thanks and began ^^^^^V^^^^og
bone. While this master-dog ate the meat, tb.e ^?^fuV
discretely went behind a screen and pretended to ^^-« QtV^ei^
of meat, not wanting any more anything, glad ^ r^g aS
fellow enjoyed it. Now, in this case the dog's tli-oxig^^ ? ^^
human as any man can have, were as lucid as '^Tr^ \^e\y^^^
the first wagging of the tail the dog thought:^ f^ \V^lien
'Bum' would enjoy that bone; I will give it to ^^?^'-^ght ^^^
he carried it, all the time wagging his tail, his ^^P^ l^t tba*
evidently: "Bum, nice, kind Bum, will be pleased ^" &

169

good bone/^ When he laid it before the other dog the idea
^as as clear as daylight: "Now, my dear Bum, here is a
splendid bone; I hope you will enjoy it; — no, thanks, I have
^aten all I care and am sleepy." While blinking behind the
screen, as fine a specimen of self-denial as ever man gave,
his thought was evidently: "I hope Bum don't think I de-
prived myself of anything; it was a real nice bone and still
plenty of delicious meat on it, but Bum has protected me,
and given me a home, and I want to show my gratefulness."
Animals don't think!! There are thousands of similar cases
on record; all animals think. Some of them have even the
most curious customs and manners imaginable, e. g., a cimex
lectucaria, a vulgar, stupid, offensive pest has an immense
sense of property right and respect of private rights. Some
time ago the author caught some and put them into a glass.
Por six weeks they were fasting, growing thinner and thinner.
He now placed a fat, plump, freshly caught bug, full of
blood, with them. The fasters all gathered around him, be-
came excited, but not one tapped the plump one to help him-
self to his blood. Men, dogs, wolves, cats, spiders and ants,
etc., under similar conditions, eat their own kind; a very
queer code of etiquette exists among these bugs, so complex
and hidden that the author has not been able to make out its
ineaning; it is difficult to describe because it seems such a
cnivalrous making room on the part of elder males to ladies
and children; all animals, when studied carefully, have been
proved to be as full of ceremonies, manners, apparently arbi-
ni« ? customs, etc., as man. Their thoughts are as well
stw 7^ ®® ™®°'s and of the same qualitative type, only re-
PieV ^y ^^^^^ simpler conditions of life. The horse which
Tear ^^ ^^® feed-box from the ground and places it on the
seen v ^^ ^^P^'ese wagon to have it more handy, as we have
thi^iJ' ^^^^, is a horse-genius, it does an enormous amount of
ries'^ in proportion to its small brain; the cat which car-
frip>.i® kitten up a sixty-foot ladder, because there lives a
• iP^ ^ho feeds them, is another inventor of the feline tribe.
in Ji'^^bism, also in this, as in nearly everything else, tar
on ^^^^^ce of eTeliovahism or Christianity, treats animals
the ^^^^e fully t?ie equal of man. While their theory that
ihL.>iofl f^J« tive may reside in a certain animal and
^^^^e to kill tliat animal would be murder is not suf-

170

ficiently proved; it is also not disproved and not at all as
unlikely as, e. g., the idea of a heaven paved in saloon style
with vulgar, pawn-broker-delighting gold, and ornamented
inanely with gaudy baubles, like rubies, sapphires, topazes
and other bits of colored glass set in brass and tin. Hand
in hand with the now almost extinct idea of animals domi-
nated by a blind vague mechanical "instinct" is that other
Bible-bred notion that animals exist for some purpose of
man, are made to serve man. How do the flea, louse, bed-
bug, mosquito, fly, the microbes of consumption, of typhus,
of cholera, of plague, of leprosy, of dysentery, of tetanus,
of splenic fever, etc., serve man? Is man their innate mas-
ter? Can he even utilize one millionth part of the animals
existing? Man can make animals only serve him as he
studies them, tames them, conquers them. Billions of ani-
mals live which do not even know of the existence of man,
e. g., ants, worms, infusoria, fishes, etc. The question often
foolishly asked: What good are the cockroaches — or other
animals? implies that the earth is created for man. Much
more justified would the cimex be in saying "Man was
created for us;" but even this curious parasite so difficult to
eradicate has to work for his living and many fail to simply^
find a man. The author observed that they walk and travel
great distances; in a certain hut in the mining region there
was no bug the first season; the second season the author
discovered several on a rough bridge across a gulch from
another hut in which they were abundant, and the third
season they had reached the first hut. They are very keen
of scent and may be observed to turn their heads towards a
person fifty feet away. But thousands starve annually, only
those with greatest endurance and keenest scent survive;
no remedy against them except eternal vigilance. Who is
the master in this case? A curious implement acquired by
long experience and billions of deaths is the feeding tube of
this bug. As he is large, conspicuous, slow, utterly repul-
sive, a sting which hurts would be felt and be death to the
stinger, he could not escape; hence slowly those survived
whose sting was painless. This the bug brings about by an
extremely slender tool and excellent microscope eyes en-
abling him to insert it between nerves; he also does not suck,
he merely allows our hearts to pump him full. The oflEensive

odor is not intended especially against man, but is used
against each other under certain conditions. It seems to be
almost free from diseases and enemies; the author noticed
only mice and a few spiders feeding on them. They cause
sufficient loss of blood to almost kill little children and weak
persons. The author observed once in a tenement house a
colony of about 12,000 (measured by weight) behind a mop
board; as each one weighed in the average 28 milligrams
they weighed 336,000 milligrams or 12 ounces. Three small
children slept near and were very weak and emaciated. No
wonder, every three weeks the pest drew 12 ounces of blood
from them.

Why do we occupy ourselves with such an odious pest?
Because the philosophy of their existence only forces us
to allow to every animal the same rights which man pos-
sesses, namely, the right of existence forced from others,
no divine superiority for man which he has not earned by
his work. How will the cimices stand before the Pantheos
of Justice? What do they give man for the blood they take
from him? Wherein lies their back action? While the bug
robs us of our blood he stores up our claim against him»
We will get square, not the slightest fear or danger of our
losing anything; it may be even that the bug takes from
us the blood of which we robbed other animals without need
or necessity.

Did Noah take a pair of them into the ark? How did
they live in the paradise? Now, they will absolutely starve
unless they can get warm flowing blood from a hairless
skin; the bug cannot suck, the blood must be pumped into
him by some living working heart! It is all very well to
extol the usefulness of the horse, cow, sheep, goat, hen, etc.,
the beauty, love and charm of women and men, but the
world contains also pests, excellent means to upset paradises,
arks, and other fables.

172

XVII.

OEIGINALITY, HEROES AND MARTYRS.

Not a single thought in man is original; what we call
original is only a new form or combination which did not
occur to us before and which strikes us as not likely of having
occurred to us. Thus Edison's Kinetoscope was anticipated
in originality by the old gyroscope, a children's toy centuries
old, where a card on two strings bore on one side the picture
of rider, on the other of his horse; by twirling the card the
rider appeared mounted. Quite different when we come to
groups of men, generations or centuries. If we divide the
world into such groups we will find that in each appear
groups of original discoveries of which we can even hardly
detect a trace in the foregoing; but they are only relatively
original, represent frequently such an elaboration of a single
fertile idea that the detail bewilders us. It may be said
that while the individual man has no original idea, he may
fertilize an old dormant idea by an admixture of individual
enthusiasm into a living idea with practical results. That
the (enthusiasm is almost everything, the idea only subordi-
nate, is illustrated daily; the inventor of a certain cloth
button M^hich did not advance humanity measurably became
rich from his idea; the inventor of the trolley system never
reaped one dollar from his invention. But, coupled with
enthusiasm must be the proper commercial skill and, last but
not least, a prosperous fate, i. e., a combination of circum-
stances, persons and conditions outside of the control of the
inventor, so to speak, a favorable tide or wind into which
he is thrown, the result of Past or Future Justice combined
with Destiny. Many people talk of Genius. What do they
mean by it? Analyzing the expression shows that it means
any one shrewder in his line of work than any other person
tliey know. Frequently the word is meant for a man full
of mechanical fancies without capabilities or desire to ac-
tually bring them into use. Edgar Poe has compared genius

173

and talent so admirably that it seems useless to add anything
in prosaic language. Fortunately almost every person has
some trait of genius in him and also some talent; genius
needs but little education, talent very much. Genius is a
natural capability, talent a great teachability in a certain
line, hence a cultivated one. Thus the author once knew a
boy eight years of age who, with a pair of shears, could cut
from paper without previous outlines very good pictures of
cats, dogs, horses, but he could not draw them; there was a
genius of some kind in that boy. Another boy never made
an adding mistake in his work; he was never particularly
rapid, but no mistake of adding ever occurred in his work,
and he had the most supreme confidence in his additions,
but his multiplications were just as full of errors as those
of other pupils. Another mastered Latin with ease to such
a degree that never for years could the teacher find a mis-
take, but his Greek or English work was not above average.
Another boy indulged in the reprehensible habit of using a
putty blower and with lightning rapidity could he hit any
given square inch of other boys' faces; in nothing else was he
brilliant. Now, if parents are careful to find such natural
traits of genius in their children they will have much easier
work in their education. There is probably only one child
out of five which has not a predominant facile trait which
may be cultivated to almost any degree; but to develop the
girl who, as a little child, sings out of tune into a prodigy of
music is waste of time. To make an artist of a boy who
never draws on his own accord, or at six years of age still
draws men as an egg with four sticks, two for walking and
two to be convulsed in some kind of epileptic fits, is an ab-
surdity; they are marked to be at best way below mediocrity.
Frequently the parents are also ignorant of what to do with
such a trait, e. g., a boy loves to daub colors over everything
and the parents think he must be destined for a great artist,
forgetting that house and fence painters and calciminers
also use paints. In many boys such occupations mean
merely that they like to be busy. Very few are the genius
in more than one direction, like Dor^; quite common those
in one direction; exceedingly common those with some talent
which means marked teachability in that direction; rare
those without any cultivable intellectual tendency.

174

The children of older parents seem in every way better
equipped than those of younger ones. How often do we find
the third, fourth or sixth son of a family becoming famous
while the first and second remain mediocrities. Fortunately
the Egos entering a child are very rarely those which have
left a dead ancestor of the same child, otherwise the human
race would be a monotonous series.

No two men ever existed who were even approximately
alike, especially in mental development. It is most impor-
tant for the progress of mankind that there should be some
men who boldly proclaim certain ideas who are ready to
defend them and ready to die for them. Others will imme-
diately feel called upon to accept or attack the new ideas and
the sharpening of the intellects during the ensidng battle
constitutes the advance gained. Frequently some men with
excellent, clear cut, bright ideas have not the facility of ex-
pressing them well. They are the soldiers who, with excel-
lent weapons, have not the training to use them properly;
others have ideas and without regard to their merit make a
great noise about them; they are the soldiers who fire their
guns into the air to scare the enemy; a well drilled soldier
uses his gun sparingly only with best aim and coolest judg-
ment. But mankind cannot progress if somebody does not
put up a goal either to be reached or to be avoided. No-
where are battles fiercer than in the realm of intellect, be-
cause the warriors are immortal, ever young ones rush to
take the place of those tired; no matter if one intellect sur-
renders to the enemy, others are ready to fight in its place,
and with full knowledge all weapons not only those of argu-
ment, written, printed or spoken are used, but also hatred,
malice, envy, love and friendship are called to aid. A man
with an "unpopular" idea is shunned, ostracized; even his
house is burnt over his head, his children are estranged, his
wife made to leave him; but if he is the true hero he will
fight on in his conviction. This life may have no reward
for him beyond the grand one of the truth to his conviction,
but he takes the spirit of the hero into the grave, this spirit
will push him on during his summation life's sleep, the
interval of his extinction as man; it will push him far ahead
of those who died complacently in an old lazy attitude, and
he will reap his reward. Let us enter the "gates of Eter-

175

nity^' with a balance on the right side of our ledger, a bal-
ance of truth, activity, harmony and love, and unless our
whole world is a fabric of a demon, we may expect reason-
able reward; human development shows a preponderance
of the Pantheos of Justice, Liberty and Pleasure over De-
struction, Slavery and Pain.

Each phase of Pantheos entering humanity exacts, so to
speak, from the Pantheos of Humanity a toll in the form of
human lives; and as there are thousands of millions of
phases the sacrifices are innumerable; every man dies within
a certain Pantheos; his life is sacrificed to that phase; that
Pantheos finds its very existence within humanity in the
beings controlled and killed by it and its future is identified
with that of the victims who died for that Pantheos.
Hence, also within the Pantheos of Development we find
heroes innumerable, every one is a hero, martyr or coward;
the difference between a hero and a martyr may be said to
be that between acute and chronic diseases; a hero sacrifices
self or any lower phase of Pantheos to a higher one within
a- short time, so that people are powerfully impressed with
the single act; a martyr spreads his sacrifice over a longer
time. Another distinction is also according to the quality
of the act; a hero performs rather a positive act, a martyr
a negative endurance, but the latter distinction is rather
superficial, for even the martyr of a cancer does the positive
act of growing a cancer; his body unconsciously studies the
cancer and its Ego takes that knowledge of it with him into
futurity.

Within the Pantheos of the Body the martyrs are legions;
every toothache has a martyr* contributing his mite to the
Human Equation, to the advance of dentistry, to the im-
provement of his body. Thousands have died from bad
teeth and their consequences, but to-day the person who dies
from blood poisoning from an abscessed tooth is exceedingly
rare. In 1880 the author examined an old Indian grave,
a lower jaw was uncovered and a large bone defect found
due to an abscess of a carious tooth; that Indian probably
had died from blood poisoning from that bad tooth. Ani-
mals in captivity and nature (lions, tigers) are found at the
age of only twenty years to be suffering more with bad teeth
than modern man. Many of them die annually from blood

176

poisoning due to tooth abscesses; more yet from inability to
properly chew the food. Man through toothache and its
martyrs has developed a highly organized art, viz.: den-
tistry. The phases of Pantheos of Teeth, of Nerves, of
Dentistry, of Enjoyment of Life have all claimed their lives.
The phase of the Pantheos of Toothache is an ancient phase
of the past, now dying out; there are vastly fewer tooth-
aches to-day in well groomed people than were 100 years
ago.

Within the Pantheos of the Family the wife is the great-
est martyr and, strange to say, the Pantheos of Childbirth
and Childpains is hardly yet in the descendancy, even
slightly in itself in the ascendancy owing to neglect of
proper education of girls; the art of delivery is hardly equal
to increasing difficulties. If the phase of Pantheos at the
deep bottom of childpains gains but little more, it will mean
the extinction of the human race. Hence, the wife is a
manifold martyr; to her body, to the family, and to hu-
manity. If she views properly the importance of these de-
grees of Pantheos she is compelled in the interest of hu-
manity or family to sacrifice her body.

But the body, especially of women, is capable of a degree
of endurance not met with in men, and irregularities within
the body of average woman, losses of blood, which would kill
an average man, pass off after awhile, leaving her hale and
hearty. Among 100 centenarians there are in all countries
70 women and only 30 men; almost all the women centenar-
ians were married ones, some with up to 15 children; of the
men 25 out of 30 are or were married. One case of a cen-
tenarian, hale and happy old woman was that of a person
who from the fifteenth to the fiftieth year was not for one
day free from sexual pains and troubles, had suffered all the
common diseases, misplacements and abnormal innervations
of her organs, had lost at an estimate in 35 years 600 pounds
of blood, had borne with great pain 8 living and 1 stillborn
child; yet, at the age of 50, she enjoyed a comparative hap-
piness, at 60 felt positively younger and stronger than at
30 years of age and from there on felt as well as the health-
iest man. Hence, Humanity has within its possibilities a
power of partly rewarding the sufferer; for now, surrounded
by children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren, all

of them revering her and owing to her their existence, she
said she would go again through the same misery to enjoy
the same happiness. Can we suppose logically that the mo-
ther who dies in childbed has not merely deferred her happi-
ness, has not merely posted into her ledger account of duties
performed a large item on the creditor side which all phases
of Pantheos in whose service she died are beholden to the
Pantheos of Justice to wipe out with correspondingly large
receipts of happiness? Even if a hero, fatigued, falls asleep
after his exertions, he will find his reward awaiting him
when he awakens.

In the realm of Ideals of intellect (Religion) the martyrs
are legions from Socrates to Rob Ingersoll; some martyrs
have died for every imaginable creed, theory, hypothesis,
notion, habit, even for words;, for science as many as for
religion. The martyrs are not only martyrs of body, but
also of intellect. The man who resignedly says: "It does
not seem logical, but I have to believe it," is a martyr in his
logic, if he reaches this conclusion not from laziness but
from an overpowering bias. The creed of Grecianism was
singularly tolerant to Germanism, Gaulism, Slavism, but ex-
ceedingly savage against Christianity. It may always be
said that the Pantheos of a certain religion is tolerant to an
inferior religion, savage and revengeful, even within its
powers destructive against an equal or superior one. The
savagery of Christianity against Aztecs, Mahommetans in
Spain between 700 A. D. and 1600 A. D. showed that it
did not consider itself so vastly superior to these creeds.
Only Shintoism (a sect of Buddhism) in 1600 to 1800 was
savage against Christianity; true Bramaism looks at it in-
differently with the same degree of tolerant feeling that it
displays towards Mahommetanism. The Unitarians would
never contemplate to deprive Baptists or Methodists of the
right to oath or of credibility on the witness stand, but the
reverse has actually occurred and is still the case in Massa-
chusetts, etc. Pantheists preach the broadest toleration
towards all creeds, have not even a feeling of hatred or envy
or dislike of any, only a slightly pitying attitude combined
with willingness to rescue those willing to be saved from the
intellectual stagnancy of the morass of revealed religions;
but observe the hatred of the church against Giordano

178

Bruno, Galilei, Voltaire, H. Spencer, Darwin. Slowly the
martyrs for progress have shorn the church of its worldly
powers; the blood of progressists on the hands of the church
has cried for Justice.

The millions of Protestants killed and tortured from 400
A. D. (Arians, in the fifth century) to 1897 (Mexico) have
laid the double foundation of progress and freedom from nar-
row creed fences around the corral in which the Catholic
priests confine the intellects they own, and have piled up
an account of violence, cruelty, murder against the Catholic
church before the Pantheos of Justice for which the pej^e-
cuting church has to give equivalent. Part of the equiva-
lent is the loss of intellects going on steadily and more and
more rapidly since 1517. Even th^ Protestant sects like
that darkest of dark Africa of Protestantism, the New Eng-
land Puritans have large accounts against them, from the
persecution of the Quakers to the last witch they burnt in
Salem. Can anything in the annals of Catholicism or Ma-
hommetanism equal the attitude of a Puritan Cotton Mather
in about 1700 who, as an original letter of his published in
1897 tells, advised sending a state ship to intercept another
ship conveying Quakers to Philadelphia, to capture them and
sell them for rum into slavery in Cuba! (See papers of May,
1897.) The "heartache*^ which the present staunch Congre-
gationalist experiences when he hears the shouts of a pleased
multitude enjoying a Sunday base ball game, when he has
to read of an address of that fine, progressive pioneer of true
Pantheism Mr. Rob. IngersoU delivered on a Sunday in a
crowded opera house, while the droning Congregationalist
preacher tells to empty benches of the justice (?) of his
Jehovah who sends the good wife to heaven, her beloved
husband and unconverted babe to hell, this heartache is
merely a little trifle in the punishment of his creed for its
barbarities. It is doomed to die, even to-day it does not
hold its own. While about 1700 A. D. Massachusetts was
over 70 per cent actual active puritan in creed, to-day not
15 per cent are church members of that denomination now
called Congregationalism, in good standing in that state, a
proportionate loss in 200 years of over 8,000,000 prospective
believers. Two hundred years from now it will only
be a historical lurid record with a few scattered

179

churches, and less than one-tenth per cent of the
population as believers, without power to enslave,
torture or kill people or legislate about them. The
Presbyterians of Geneva, Evangelists of Zurich, Luther-
ans of Hesse, Orthodox Greeks of Russia, etc., have all
spread the gospel by fire and sword and are all doomed to
die. Every act of violence will react against the creed that
practices it. The great vitality of pure Bramaism lies in its
toleration. Pantheism as an intellectual ideal has had in-
numerable sacrifices in its behalf and only one blotch on its
escutcheon — ^although even this is more a case of individual
envy, revenge and an outbreak of brutality unattached to
any creed, — the French Revolution with its excesses. Al-
though the number of victims for truly religious reasons
was not more than 5,000, less than the number of Waldenses
sacrificed to Catholicism (over 800,000), less than the Saxons
(800 to 820) sacrificed by Charlemagne to Christianity (over
1,000,000), the Aztecs sacrificed to Catholicism, etc. (over
4,000,000), Pantheism by the practice of so much greater
toleration now, when no longer cruelly oppressed, and re-
fraining from revenge for recent outrages, may atone for the
excesses then committed.

Within the sphere of Nationalism the heroes are more
feasted and admired than the martyrs; but the mother at
home earning the living for the children, while the hus-
band fights the battles of the country, bears in her anxiety,
worry, hope, fear, a greater martyrdom than he displays
heroism.

All those who fell in battle for the nation are loops form-
ing the network or woven fabric of the Pantheos of their
nation, and as this Pantheos gathers or loses strength it
rewards its followers or deserters with their proper due.
Who can say that the ascendancy of Emperor William II.
to the German throne was not in reward for some valor-
ous death in the past? His Egos separated at the battle of
Merseburg may reap their reward. Our sentiments of na-
tionality and patriotism, as yet hardly fainter than those of
our own selves, will form in the aggregate the nationality
of the future and will reap or repent according to the degree
to which they and the survivors have helped to improve or
degrade the nation^s future. The man who is indifferent

180

to national questions has only himself to blame if^ in some
distant future, he reawakens again in uncomfortable condi-
tions, in a nation governed by ancient musty ancestral laws,
almost unimprovable, like the United States constitution,
with bullies and cutthroats occupying high places. The
man who participated actively in all the struggles of his
race will share its honor, and only that race or nation will
survive ultimately in which most citizens place private in-
terest below tribal progress. There are, fighting within the
phase of Pantheos called nationality, many phases of Pan-
theos of development of the individual, family, social units,
methods and aims.

It may be said as a logicon that any idea for which people
gave their lives has thereby received the nucleus of Egos
which will make it live. Even the anarchists* of Chicago
who, attacked by the bodily representatives of other phases
of Pantheos, in defence slew them and were in consequence
executed, because the Pantheos of police domination pre-
vailed, are the pillars upon which their phase of Pantheos
grows. People may wonder in 1,000 years about that "phe-
nomenal luck" of that fellow "Seips" who had the presi-
dency of some mighty social republic, so to speak, thrust
upon him. He fought and died for it a thousand years ago,
and received his nomination in his death.

In the battle of St. Privat (1870) 40,000 grenadiers, the
flower of Germany, attacked three times one of the fiercest
positions in that war, they left 12,000 on the field, these
12,000 are marked for honors in future forms of German-
ity; their Egos will reap the rewards which the phase of
nationalism, here specialized as Germanity, can offer. But
it can only offer rewards, if the survivors push forward, ad-
vance, develop the idea for which those heroes died.

Thus the 300,000 victims of the revolution in the South
against the North in the United States will find their re-
ward in the developing phases of the Pantheos of their
states, their union. The reward will be the greater the
more the survivors develop these ideas; confederacy is dead,
but the spirit which means independence of states, the right
to enter a union and right to go out, will live. No war

•Any reader of this book wiU notice that the author's views have
very little in common with Anarchism, which is nothing but Envy
married to Brutality.

181

ever settled a principle of pure justice. ' A truly free nation
consisting of separate units has not only the freedom of
Union, but also the freedom of Separation.

Those 350,000 victims of war of the North who fought and
died for the abolition of slavery, for the forcible retention in
the Union of States which desired to separate, will and do
reap rewards from their Pantheos, which they built up, and
which in popular language is called "The Spirit of the
Union," a truly fine spirit against external enemies.

Thus everywhere men have died, but nowhere have men
ever died in vain. Even the victim of a disease on his death-
bed dies in the battle of survival of the race over a spirit
of destruction embodied in disease, harmful microbes, chem-
icals, or a victim to mechanical causes in the service of hu-
manity. His reward will be the information which his Egos
unconsciously receive about the nature of the disease and
the process of death, and will serve him at his next awaken-
ing.

These numerous phases of Pantheos, "spirits" the popular
language calls them, the spirit of anarchism, the spirit of
free speech, "the spirit of police supremacy," the "spirit of
free government," etc., are even more comprehensive than
the "spirits" or phases of Nationality. They are phases of
the Pantheos of national ideals within the soul while the
national spirit seems to be predominatingly one of the body,
of language, past customs, past history. Thus the spirit
of individual liberty is the same in France as in Germany,
in England as in Russia, even in Switzerland as in Ala-
bama, its martyrs are legions. The highest national phase
of Pantheos is the one realizing most all those international
phases or "spirits" within the Pantheos of Harmonious Per-
fection.

A very curious difference in nationalities is shown when
troops go into battle. All are, so to speak, on the death
bed, all feel death coming, they are all at the supreme mo-
ment of a breakup; the true inward nature of nations is
clearly revealed. The Frenchman advances with a rush, re-
sounding: vive la France! chargez! allons! en avant! fill
the corps; — men begin to fall, more and more fall to right
and left and the soldiers become gradually silent, essentially
shouting to each other only what the enemy is doing, threat-

182

ening to do; the expletives uttered refer to bullets, shrapnels,
cannons, trees; when the enemy shows the slightest trace of
yielding, in unison the *^en avant^^ roar pushes the troops
forward; but, if the enemy is stubborn, silence prevails
through the army; it is especially difficult for French troops
to stand, still waiting while men are falling; a sudden panic
arises; driblets here and there move backward and — ^like a
Mississippi boring through the levee, — ^all at- once a "sauve
qui peut^' is heard, and the army has become a mob. Only
the French language has the idea of this "save himself who
can/'

The German sings by regiments and armies; even while
soldiers are already falling his "am Rhein, am Ehein, am
deutschen Rhein^' is heard; all at once, an oppressive silence;
the regiment splits up into fighting lines, the officers':
Vorwarts, kinder! strikes the ear all over the field and
quietly, with little demonstration, the fighting machine
moves; they do not curse the enemy, curse very little in gen-
eral, their expressions like "Donner and Blitz" are devoid of
every element of "profanity;" they are mere expletives; their
shouts to each other refer mostly to what they themselves
are doing or ought to do, encourage each other; they feel that
the battle takes care of itself, if they are only doing their
best; their aim is not the battle but the duty. Their confi-
dence in officers, leaders, generals is so great that they stand
even fierce losses unable to reply, or while waiting for some
movement, without getting demoralized; when victorious,
they act and laugh like children. As the account of Forbes,
the London Times correspondent in the war of 1870-71,
shows, they are at all times most considerate of the enemy,
aim far more to disable than to kill, are even averse to killing
and take little of the savage pleasure in killing which French
and English seem to experience; even in retreat they rarely
become demoralized; it is merely a retreating attack. The
English and Anglo-Americans act alike in battle. The
pleasure of killing, hitting the enemy is predominant, the
soldiers of both nations go into a fight with strings of
"curses" (?) at the enemy: "Kill the devils! Send the
devils to hell! Give them hell!" Their rush is savage,
fierce; they seem to care little about being hit, if only they
succeed in killing enemies*

183

The instinct of the hunter, pioneer, adventurer, colonizer
in the English race is also shown in battle; the inferior race
is annihilated by him. The North American, essentially an
Englishman, is not innately cruel, far from it; but his fight-
ing savagery is greater than of any race, fully the equal of
Arabs and Dervishes. He is almost entirely unable to stand
exposure to fire where he cannot or must not reply, but is in
defense as brave as in attack. His superiority is that of the
individual, officers are no better with him than privates; he
does not need the officers nearly as much as a French, even
less than the German private. In the fierceness of the actual
fight he often overlooks great tactical blunders, suffers use-
lessly by them, and does not seem to realize that victory and
defeat depend far more on tactics than on fighting. During
almost a century English and American troops have not
been pitted against even good troops of Europe, hence real
comparisons are difficult. In the civil war of 1861-1865
fighting was far more emphasized than strategy. The at-
tack of Pickett^s brigade at Gettysburg was a most heroic
exhibit of fierce fighting, courage, daring, savagery com-
bined with positively infantile inane strategy; the individual
showed up splendidly, the aggregate as embodied in the gen-
erals very weak.

When the call for 250,000 volunteers in the Spanish-
American war (1898) was issued nine-tenths of those en-
listing wanted to do some fighting, and when the equally
military but less showy duty of garrisoning, marching, etc.,
began, 200,000 of the 250,000 swamped friends, politicians,
congressmen and senators with petitions to be mustered out;
again the same glaring difference between the fighting spirit
of the individual soldier and the general management was
quite as evident as in 1861-65. The Spaniards did
not belie their wretched reputation as soldiers, ac-
quired since 1555 (Metz) and religiously maintained in
every war since then (Trafalgar, Badajoz); they are
only good soldiers against their own kind or if
aided by stronger troops. Almost equally weak are the
Italians; the private soldier of Italy is of very low in-
tellectual grade and therefore easily panic stricken (Adowa,
Custozza). The higher the intellect the less danger of
panic in a troop. History, during the last 300 years, would

184

show that with equal weapons about the following number
of soldiers are equally matched: 1,000 Englishmen^900
American»:=850 North Germans=l,100 South 6ermans=
1,200 Russians=l,100 Freneh=l,000 Japanese=4,00O
Spaniard8=3,006 Italians=950 Turks=5,500 Greek8=l,000
Swedes=l,500 Sepoy8=l 0,000 Chinese=3,500 Mexicans=
1,300 mixed Austrians; on sea the data are not quite as ex-
tensive, but probably the following ratio would not be far
from the truth: 1,000 Englishmen^850 Amerieans=900
Germans=900 Swede8=l,000 Hollanders=950 Dane8=
1,000 Norwegians=l,500 French=2,000 Rus8ians=2,500
Greeks=5,000 Turk8=3,000 Italians=4,000 Spaniards=
1,100 Japane8e=2,000 Chinese=l,200 Austrians, etc.

The heroes and martyrs in the service of the next higher
unit (Races) were those who in 710 to 712 combined all
Europe against the Arabs surging in from Spain, who in 955
as All-Teutons defeated the Huns on the plains of the Licus;
who in 1277 at Merseburg, gathered from France, Denmark,
Germany and Poland, defeated the Mongolian Tartars; who
saved Vienna from the Turks; who in 1821 annihilated the
Turkish fleet at Naupolis; who even in 1882 intimidated
Japan, then victorious against China.

In the next higher unit "Humanity'^ the proper appre-
ciation of the Hero is yet lacking. Who is more of a hero:
A Hobson, who in June, 1898, in the glare of hundreds of
searchlights from the Press of the World, the watchful eyes
of over 60 millions of citizens of the United States, the ofl&-
cers and men of 40 ships, selected from 5,000 volunteers, all
ready to do the same thing, a relatively safe, because well
prepared act of scuttling a ship under the half dozen guns
of weak Spanish forts, with the Spaniards notoriously unable
to hit anything smaller than an island or the ocean, sank
theatrically the Merrimac at Santiago; a Dewey, who with 8
ships annihilated a fleet of ancient Spanish gun-schooners —
a feat which any sea commander of any of the 4 great na-
tions would have done equally well; or a Smith, a common
"A. C. L. Smith, of Oregon/^ who, two miles from shore
in a turbulent sea, at night, floating on a piece of wreckage
from the wreck of the Mohegan, Oct. 14th, 1898, gave up
tiiis piece to a woman and trusted to his arms his only valu-
able possession — his life? He was saved and deserved to be.

185

Nobody would have missed in the aggregate one woman more
or less drowned among the 100 victims, but Mr. Smith —
hats off! — ^was ready to give his life for this to him then
unknown woman, in the service of the Pantheos of Human-
ity. This Smith — ^noble Smith! — ^was more of a hero than
many Hobsons. Hobson only ruined — ^as it turned out use-
lessly — one ship that he might ruin or injure more, mere
destructive activity, while Mr. Smith has a positive rescue
from dea{h to his credit, and it may explain the success of
one A. C. L. Smith in perhaps 600,000 A. D.

In October, 1898, several doctors in Vienna, nurses, at-
tendants paid for their lives for a trifling neglect in their
work for Humanity. The Bubonic plague in 1400 to 1500
threw Europe backward 500 years, and killed over 50,-
000,000 Europeans. Realizing that it may at any time
spread beyond India, these men studied this most danger-
ous disease from cultures brought from India. In spite of
their experience and caution Drs. Mueller, Pecha, and 3
attendants died as heroes in the service of humanity — ^none
of those infected recovered! That the English authorities
in Bombay succeeded so well in confining this most infec-
tious disease, speaks well for their ability. If the Missis-
sippians now already show such a panic, if face to face with
a minute epidemic of yellow fever with only a 12 per cent
death rate, they would probably die of fear, if only reading
of a plague epidemic, with a death rate of 90 per cent, and
over 95 per cent of all people liable to catch it — in a small
city of France, in 1447, only 120 were left of 6,000 after 2
months of this plague!

Even in phases subordinate to nation, like party, are
many heroes. Mr. Smyth, of Chicago, who for years gives
his time, energy, money for the best of an intrinsically quite
good, constructive party, without ever getting an "ofiice,"
is to not a mean degree a party hero.

In phases beyond humanity we have the heroes well
marked. The arctic explorer is a hero in the service of the
Pantheos of the Earth, the Pantheos of Cold; the aeronaut
even a hero in the Pantheos of our Cosmos, because deep
underlying aerial navigation is the desire to visit other plan-
ets. Every one of us is daily a hero and coward in some
phase of Pantheos.

18G

XVIII.
TEUTH AND FALSEHOOD.

Truth is the manifestation of thought through our means
of expressing thoughts within a phase of Pantheos in the
ascendancy or a Pantheos of the future; a falsehood, within
a phase of Pantheos in its descendancy or a Pantheos of the
past; but this is only one view and affects only the deep
natures of truth and falsehood. Viewed still deeper truth
is the predominance of the Pantheic phase of attraction
(love), falsehood that of repulsion (hatred), and still from
another view: truth is the predominance of future purposes,
falsehood of past purposes, and still another view is: truth
serves predominatingly the purposes of the larger unit,
falsehood those of a smaller one.

Analyzing only the spoken truth and falsehood we have
at the start to realize that absolute truth is an impossibility,
just as an absolute lie is not within our conception. Every
statement we make is a mixture of both, and the truthful
person tries his best to make the mixture as correct as his
highest standard and ability allow. It is curious how in many
such cases numerous phases of Pantheos combine. But to test
the question of an absolute truth, let us take the simplest
form: *^Two times two is* four." This statement is almost
devoid of the personal element of the Ego of my soul, the
Ego of my body and even the combined Egos called John
Doe, C. Amryc, or any other name; hence all the phases of
Pantheos centered in these Egos are, so to speak, not inter-
ested, inactive, mere machines, but as we pronounce it, we
have to use a certain language. Supposing we pronounce it
before a person not knowing English. He answers: tooti
mstoo isf or! What nonsense! and he begins to question the
statement. We write it out 2X2^4 and ho says in his lan-
guage: "Well, is that what you mean by that dago talk?
1 don't believe anybody talks that way." Hence our state-

•"Is" is more logical because I do not reckon single units, but con-
sider 4 as a single figure not as 4 individual 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1.

187

ttient is already a little questionable. We meet another in-
telligent person, a Chinaman, not understanding English
and write 2X2==4. He says: How badly you write non-
sensical Chinese: "Tha gon Tha Iman ugong/' Why, that
means "roof never roof missing bedcover !^^ And you say
"two times two is four/' There is no sense in what you say,
for "two'' is a shed and you make the sign of the roof, etc.
Hence even such a simple statement depends for its under-
standing on a previously agreed meaning of signs and
sounds. It is therefore only a relatively true statement, and
is rank nonsense to those not familiar with the code.

Even among our own fellow countrymen the statement be-
gins to be questioned; some say you ought to say: "Two
times two are four;" others say "you pronounce your "two"
wrong, just as if it was "too," instead of "tew," as it ought
to be; also "four" you pronounce as if it was a part of "there-
fore," etc. Hence this apparently absolutely correct state-
ment has already shades of uncertainty about it.- Never-
theless, with all its imperfection, the statement becomes no
positive lie because the purpose of deception is lacking.

But, supposing our system of figuring to be based on the
dual instead of decimal plan; only 2 figures are needed, 01,
to express all figures. If the agreement as to writing figures
remains the same, namely, that each following figure should
be in value the next lower power of our basis (10), in the
dual system it would be ^ of the preceding, hence our first
ten figures would be

1= 1

10= 2

11= 3

100= 4

101= 5

110= 6

111= 7

1000= 8

1001= 9

1010=10

11110100001000100000=1000000

1011—

1100—

1101—

1110—

1111—

10000—

10100—

10101—

100000—

1000000—

1100010—

100

1111111000—

1000

188

Our statement 2x2=4 would become 10x10=100 and
would not mean our present 10x10 but 2x2! 3x7=21 would
be 11x111=10101, entirely wrong as viewed by the decimal
system. Our table of figures would have to be pronounced
in analogy, namely:
one=one,
two=ten,
four=hundred,
eight=thousand,
etc., and 3x7=21 would have to be pronounced: ten one x
hundred ten one = ten thousand hundred one, appar-
ently highly absurd.

This dual system is used actually and extensively in higher
mathematics, and has afterwards to be translated into the
decimal system; and because our language has no good ade-
quate language forms it is written as the powers of 2 thus:
1=2«
2=2^
3=2i+2<>
4=2»
5=22+2<»

g g.2_Lgl_i.gO

1000000=2i»+2"+2i^+ 2i«+2^*+2»+2«

Anybody can see that a dual statement of (2*+2®)x(2*+2^
+2«)=2*+22+ 2« or 11x11 1=101 01 although apparently
utterly wrong in the decimal system if we mean to say
3x7=21, is perfectly correct in itself. To show that this
dual system is not an absurdity, just consider how much sim-
pler all operations are as compared with the decimal system.

5+7=12; dual 101+111=1100; the dual is reckoned like
the ordinary, the decimal system carries 1 when the sum of
two units is above 10; the dual carries one when the sum of 2
units is 2 or above 2.

Decimal system 7—5=2, dual 111—101=10.

Decimal system 12-^-4=3, dual 1100-^100=11.

Fractions 1-5, dual 1-101; decimal fraction 0.2, dual sys-
tem 0.00101 (endless).

This is merely to show that thoroughly sensible things
may appear like enormous absurdities and lies, if the ex-
planation is wanting; and how many so-called lies are merely
so considered because the terms used are misunderstood.

189

All our best truth depends on more or less previous agree-
ment as to terms.

Even in other logics similar difficulties are encountered in
regard to reaching absolute truth and absolute falsehood.
A well known example is that: "Black is white/' which
seems on the face of it absurd, but the absurdity is only
due to our lack of agreement as to what is "black," what
is "white'^ and in what sense the little word "is" is used in
this case. If we mean "the absence of light equals . the
presence of light/' the statement is not identical with the
above, but is a more pronounced absurdity. But to return
to ^T)lack is white" in the superficial sense of the words. We
know no absolute black; our best dyed silk is a dark blue,
charcoal is a dark brown, sulphide of iron a dark green.
We equally know no absolute white; our sun is a yellow
star, this paper is a pale blue, the snow colorless in itself is
white only from reflected yellow or blue light, hence our
whitest white is only a veiy pale tint of yellow, green, mostly
blue: Hence, black being a very dark blue and white a very
pale blue, it is evident that black and white are blues or
if two things are at the same time equal to the same thing
they must be equal; hence black is white. Of course the
last logic is not quite sound, but it is deceptive enough to
bewilder many. This statement may therefore partly be a
sophistry, yet cannot be called an absolute lie.

Much nearer do we get to absolute truth and absolute lie
when we refer to strictly human or so-called historical events.
In all those events the element of probability of the event,
competency and credibility of witnesses and correctness of
record enter as complexing factors. The more inherently
probable an occurrence, the fewer, less competent and less
reliable witnesses are needed to give a record which may be
said to be beyond reasonable doubt; the more incredible, un-
common or strange an occurrence, the more witnesses in
number, competency, intellect and credibility are needed and
the more an unquestioned record to make it beyond reason-
able doubt. Thus we have as a historic narrative that in the
year 328 B. C. Hannibal, a Carthaginese general, vanquished
the Bomans in the battle of Cannae. Is the event reason-
able? Beyond all doubt; battles have been won and fought
at all ages; hence a moderate amount of contemporaneous

190

history will make it "beyond reasonable doubt." Livius, 70
A. D., gives the most detailed account extant almost 400 years
after, but also Ennius, about 300 B. C, gives good accounts.
But the name of the general may be in doubt, even the
number of soldiers, even the place, yet the conclusion re-
mains beyond reasonable doubt that about that time a great
battle between Romans and Carthaginians was fought and
the first defeated. Now, to go further: Homer relates that
in the siege of Troy Mars took part as a warrior and was
wounded by Ajax. Homer or his contributors lived about
400 years after the siege of Troy. Is the event probable?
Not in the least. Hence the authority of Homer is not suf-
ficient to make us even surmise it as probable, not if a
dozen others had written about it; in fact, not if entire
Greece had made affidavit to it would we believe it consider-
ing what is claimed in regard to Mars; hence we may call this
a poetical lie, because no amount of human testimony can
overcome the inherent improbability.

Take the story of the birth of Christ from the Virgin
Mary. How many reliable witnesses are there to the fact of
Mary being a virgin at that time? Were any medical ex-
perts of the most unquestionable standing consulted? Is
not all the presumption in favor of the belief that Mary, ac-
tually married to the carpenter Joseph, bore him a son ac-
cording to the universal system?

To heighten the absurdity of this statement the ^^ir-
gin'^ Mary is even a long ago married ^oman. There were
not people enough living at that time to make such a state-
ment not only credible, but even beyond utter absurdity,
even if they had all given their joint expert testimony. Be-
sides, the inherent lack of every logic: Jehovah, who him-
self instituted the process of marriage, a clean, harmless,
short, curious and unobjectionable one, is so ashamed of his
system that he refuses to have his "son'' submit to it. That
is about the only explanation shorn of all "reverential" ver-
biage offered by those who profess to believe in "immaculate
conception." "That about in the fifteenth year of the
Emperor Augustus in Judaea a baby boy was born from a
virgin" is about the greatest historical lie that the author has
met with in any writings, at least it belongs to that group
of equally great lies told by other personal God religions

191

about their Man-Gods. The pigeon of Mohammet which, sit-
ting on his shoulder, inspires and prompts him is not one
whit less or more a lie than the '*fiery tongues descending
on some ignorant Hebrew fishermen about the year 33 A. D.
making them wise and learned/' or the story that "Buddha
ascended to heaven about 300 B. C. leaving his footprint in
the rock in Ceylon/' or that Jupiter assumed the shape of a
swan to seduce a Grecian girl.

A reproduction of cerebral processes by speech consti-
tutes language. Every uttered or written phrase calls up
the criterion of truth or lie, to decide which is often very
difl&cult. Every phrase is built up from words which have
evolved through ages of blunders, incompetency, knowledge
and customs. Some words for ideas in every language are
positive lies on the face of it. Thus solder iron never was
made of iron, always of copper; the German word for it,
Lotkolben, says soldering block (of metal) and has not the
lie; but, e. g., the word in German for grasshopper — ^heu-
schrecke or hay-phantom — carries a lie; the phantom does
not live on hay. The English word "cold" for a disease is a
glaring case of a medical lie made compulsory by usage.
The French call it rhume — ^a rheumatism; the Germans a
"snuffing'^ free from the erroneous hypothesis that "a
cold" can be caught from cool temperature. Thus, every
language is full of linguistic grammatical lies.

Aside of the means of expressing ideas, aside of the his-
torical petrified lies of language itself every statement con-
tains

{a) a preponderance of truth,

(b) a predominance of falsehood,

(d) is a meaningless word jumble,

(e) a play of imagination, barring veracity tests. (Jules
Verne), etc.

Hence, not only truth and falsehood are possible; three
other critical aspects can be viewed. A person states: "I
believe that Mars is inhabited." If he is an astronomer, has
made investigations and knows what "inhabited" means, his
statement may be a truth; if he is not an astronomer, not
learned otherwise, his statement is (c); if he does not realize
what ^T^elieve" means, does use it in the sense of "suppose/'

192

"dream/* etc., it becomes a language jumble. If, on the
other hand, a selfish purpose was aimed at, it would be-
come a lie; if, for instance, the person realized the full
meaning of the words, yet made the statement for the pur-
pose of, e. g., having a rich ignorant person build a tele-
scope to see them, rather than to picture true processes of
his intellect, it would become a lie. Probably 9,999 out of
10,000 spoken phrases belong to the third and fourth
group, the "incompetent and ignorant." Especially "re-
ligion" consists almost solely of them; the prayers are fre-
quently positive lies, mostly incompetent and ignorant word
jumbles, very rarely, only in mortal distress, do they be-
come the best truth we are capable of.

In all we say we can merely attempt to give the truest ex-
pression to our mental processes, thoughts and actions. We
can never reach it in this existence. A lie cannot only be
spoken, it can be shown in the eye language, the facial ex-
pression, even in otherwise indifferent acts. Thus, the wink
of the flirt, the smile of the "villain," are even more profound
lies than those of words. The person who lives at home on
potatoes and beans, to be able to wear silk and jewels, lives
a chronic lie; although, if the purpose be only a gratification
of personal vanity, a rather innocent lie because the person
pays a fair price for it — self-denial.

How does the existence of truth and lie harmonize with a
Pantheos in whom all is harmony? Revealed religions are all
compelled to assume a wicked enemy of their God of about
equal rank with him to account for lie; for, if Jehovah could
conquer Satan, is not Jehovah, himself, responsible for all
the alleged mischief done by Satan? Hence, Satan must
be the equal of Jehovah, if only by toleration. The Pantheist
takes this view: In the first place, no lie is a lie, except for
the circumstances and conditions which make it a lie; in the
second place, from the greatest truth to the greatest lie there
is such a gradual shading of millions of grades that we can
see plainly a thorough mixture of phases of Pantheos,
which, in themselves, harmoniously amalgamate, as Je-
hovah and Satan could never do. Thus, a pickpocket is
caught with a watch in his pocket, identified by the owner,
and the pickpocket says: "I found the watch." On the face
of it, not a credible statement; but is it a lie? Have not

193

men lost watches; have not others, even pickpockets, found
things that were lost? Supposing even he took it out of
the man's pocket, the pickpocket smiles: "Well, I found it
in his pocket!'' In an instant the lie becomes a would-be
joke. What does it matter us what the pickpocket says about
the watch. It is merely an abortive attempt to save him-
self; a lie is, therefore, here, nothing but an abortive feint
of defense. Even the man who in the dark points his finger at
a robber and says: "I'll shoot," and thereby, as it has act-
ually happened, scared off, the robber owes his life to a
^^ie.'^ Was it a lie? Was it not rather an intellectual trick
played upon another inferior intellect? All depends on how
we define lie. If the lie be viewed from a purely disinterested
standpoint it is no lie; if the intent of unearned gain be
absent it becomes merely a word play. Why is the strictest
truth preferable to ever so mild a lie? Because our highest
aim is contentment or, more ideally put. Harmonious
Perfection, and if our neighbor mistrusts us, we will suffer
in prosperity, suffer in peace, in our standing in the com-
munity, hence in contentment. Every lie is found out sooner
or later and leaves the attempt si deception standing naked,
leading to a loss of confidence of our neighbors, family
members, friends, and, in consequence, loss of an element
necessary for contentment.

One case would seem to exist where a lie, as a tool in the
service of a higher phase of Pantheos, might be justifiable,
namely, in return for a question which a person has no right
to put to us, with any expectation of our answering him
truthfully. Man, as outlined under Liberty, has the right
of choosing his name, has the exclusive keeping of his own
personal and family history; they are hifi very ownest prop-
erty, none more exclusive. Even in the money which we
"own," aside of gold whose trade value does not depend on
government stamp, the nation and government have a cer-
^ tain copartnership right; paper "money" and silver tokens
are only worth their face value, because of interwoven gov-
ernment's credit, nation's resources; hence, to a certain ex-
tent, a nation is justified in forbidding us to hoard that
which it has created for the use of all its citizens. But my
name, my family history, whether I am John Doe of Kala-
mazoo or Tom Brown of Winnipesaukee, makes no differ-

194

ence to the nation. I am the individual, details of my per-
sonal history must be considered by others as no more ob-
tainable during a linguistic, inquisitorial hold-up, than my
money by a similar one with a revolver; I impart them only
voluntarily, by my own initiative, not that of somebody
else. To refuse to answer a personal question, in view of the
low breeding, vulgarity of the ordinary asker, is usually not
wise, but to give him a wrong answer to an impolite ques-
tion serves an educatory purpose. If he finds out later that
I am not Jim Brown, as I said, and comes to me for an
explanation, the little episode will be of far more effective
educational vahie that if I had refused in the first place.
These meddlers and priers into our affairs must be educated
to respect personal privacy and Liberty.

If deeper reasons are involved, we, of course, sacrifice our
personal rights; but even then, we may draw the line at
where we think idle gossip begins.

Thus, the tax gatherer has the right to ask about my prop-
erty, but not whether I am vaccinated, had the mumps or
any sweethearts; the judge may ask about my moral stand-
ing; the statistician, properly authorized, any legal question;
the life insurance man my family's health history, etc., but
the average citizen has no more right to ask those questions,
and expect a correct answer than he has to desire a loan of
$100 of me and expect to get it. Rarely, not as frequently
as novelists would make us believe, arises in life a compli-
cation where, by a lie, we may prevent greater evil. If in
such a case we must lie, it will be found that the *^wrong*'
of the lie is merely the back-action of some preceding wrong,
and that we are merely the relatively innocent tools in the
service of Justice, righting this back-action.

195

XIX.
INSANITY IN INDIVIDUALS AND NATIONS.

In every nation may be found some hints of what has to
be described as insanity. What is actual insanity? From one
point of view it is the thinking of illogical thoughts, the
doing of illogical acts, the excessive estimate of self over
our fellow men beyond a point which is accessible to reason-
ing. While a moderate grade of these characteristics resides
in every man who made his mark in the world, because if
he was precisely like all others he would not have excelled,
yet, when they assume a certain degree, they become, at first,
merely objectionable, then a nuisance, later even a menace
and danger. Every community has thousands of citizens who
show, through thousands of degrees, the gradual transition
from soundest logic to most irrational insanity. An excellent
case is that of a rich woman who at first only showed a pref-
erence for iron furniture, because of fear of fire; after a few
years she ordered even small things: comb, fans, stools, made
of iron, until finally her love for things of iron became a
perfect "idiosyncrasy;" it was not yet offensive, only "odd;'^
later on she built an iron sidewalk; that was already offensive
in winter when coated with ice; still later she wanted all goods
delivered to her in iron vessels; that became a nuisance; but
when, on reading of the arrival of a man by the name of
Iron, she made up her mind to abduct and marry him by
•force and tried to execute her threat, she became a danger
and outlaw, as the man was already happily married and
did not wish to leave his present wife, and she had to be put
into an asylum, where she died.

Such an example shows that our best defense against in-
sanity is the most perfect logic; if we watch our acts to see
thaf they are in best logical accord with all surroundings,
we will be almost certain not to become victims of at least
that form of insanity which is frequently observed without
apparent disease of the brain or without any preceding me-

196

chanical violence. In our book on the brain we hav€ illus-
trated the subject more clearly; many cases are merely wrong
"soldering together" of a single couple of nerves in the brain.
But nations show precisely the same traits. Each nation has
its grade of insanity. In England it is the insanity of no-
bility-worship, of the pronunciation of its language, of arith-
metic expressed in its system of weights and measures; in
France the insanity of grandeur and general superiority; in
Germany the insanity of excessive school training, excessive
memorizing, slighting of home ideas, and too much worship
of foreign ideas; in Bussia the "peculiarity" of a strong, over-
strong, all-pervading church; in Spain the indulgence in the
dreams of past grandeur; in Italy the tendency towfirds "friv-
olous occupations" instead of steady productive business. In
the United States the insanities inherited from England,
a language absurd in its pronunciation, arithmetical insanity
as expressed in its so-called "system" of weights and meas-
ures, its "billion," excessive estimate of the revolution of
1777, ancestor worship, ancestor laws and ancestor govern-
ment, with a slightly excessive development of the grandeur
idea; in China an insane illogical system of language and wri-
ting, insane ancestor worship and ancestor reverence, super-
stition; in Japan illogical language in grammar and writing,
otherwise a very logical nation. Why do we say, for in-
stance, the Chinese language is illogical? Because lan-
guage is something spoken, and each word is composed of
elements, of tongue movements, each of which can be rep-
resented by a type, reducing the scale for all words to some
24 to 80 primitive sound — unit — types, called' letters;* that
system must be called the most logical which, by the simplest
rules, allows all words to be written from a simple system; as
the child analyzes his words, he spells them out (German,
Italian, Spanish); a German child of average ability has es-
sentially mastered his spelling at six years of age, what re-
mains is not the logical element, but the illogical absurd
element, exceptions and foreign words. At first sight the
Chinese symbol for woman seems simpler than spelling, but
as the meaning of words with ages changes gradually the
symbols become untrue and illogical. Thus, "excelsior"
means, originally, "more exalted," but in the United States
it means some wood shavings used for packing goods — from

197

the trade label. What sense would the Chinese picture for
excelsior have when applied to wooden shavings? Even the
system of syllable writing — Japan — ^is not logical, because
it requires far more units (which are not units) than the
writing of words from individual letters. Furthermore,
many mental processes do not allow logical symbols, but only
coarse, untrue materializations. Thus, the Chinese symbol
for love is a modified scroll of obscenity. Does that repre-
sent it? Not by any means. A very striking illustration
of the dangers of such national insanities was the recent
small war between Turkey and Greece. The Greeks, as
might be expected, have the disease of ancestor worship in the
highest degree; because those ancestors, in the relatively
poorly populated ancient countries did great deeds, they
jumped to the illogical conclusion that they, a demoralized,
mongrel race, a mixture of old Greeks (perhaps ten per cent),
Bomans (fifteen per cent). Teutons (five per cent), Slavs
(forty per cent), Turks, Syrians, and even Arabs, could per-
form those same deeds under totally difiEerent, not comparable,
conditions. The Turk of to-day, as compared with the Greek,
is not as inferior as the old Thracian was, as compared with
Alexander's phalanges. Besides, only population counts in
national struggles, not square miles; the latter count only in
long protracted warlike expeditions. In ancient times
Greece, with her five millions of people, was a great power
among the scattered tribes surrounding her of, perhaps, a
few hundred thousand each. But in 1897 about two mil-
lions of Greeks attempted an aggressive campaign against
thirty millions of Turks, and the result proved that the
act proceeded from an outbreak of an insane attitude of
mind.

A similar insanity possessed those in the South of the
United States who, with twelve millions, of which four mil-
lions were negroes and could not be counted, hoped to stand
off twenty-five millions; it was an insane, illogical over-es-
timate of their own individual worth over that of their
opponents. Such insane expressions as: "One Confederate
can whip ten Yankees," were extremely common and have
not quite died out; all the battles showed that 60,000 Con-
federates could not whip 80,000 Yankees, although a slight,
individual fighting superiority of about 60:65 per cent ex-

198

isted. The insane element lies in the feature that these
Southerners, in their sentiment, overlooked the logical fact
that the millions left behind have also to be included, be-
cause they furnish the money, provisions, weapons, fill the
gaps made by those who fell in battle or disease, their logic
was only one sided, not complete enough and overshadowed
in influence upon their acts by their emotions. Emotions
are good whips, but not a good carriage in a drive to success.
Emotion and passion are only the firing of the gun, while
logic (common sense) manufactures the gun, puts it in the
best spot, provides ammunition, sights and reloads it.

An Englishman saves in a lifetime, perhaps, two years
over a German by the use of his language, but he loses that
by having to learn how to spell and pronounce it. A China-
man is intellectually so exhausted after having well learnt
his language that he has little left for any other work.

As a case of actual, figurative, imprisonment (probably
for life) of a nation, because of insanity, may be cited that of
the Polish nation. Its insanity in the last century was the
exaltation of nobility; of ancestor rule, as expressed in its
unamendable constitution; it lead to the "liberum veto," a
case almost paralleled in the United States senate. In the
Polish senate any single nobleman by his own individual
"veto" could make the passage of every law impossible. As
there were some 200 members, Poland could hardly pass any
law; hardly progress for 200 years; of course, every neighbor
needed only to buy one nobleman to practically rule the
Polish senate; as a consequence, the nation retrograded con-
tinually, as compared with the neighbors; but their insanity
was so violent that they did not see it themselves; they
feasted on insane dreams about the many square miles of
land they possessed, the many people who spoke the Polish
tongue. In 1777 when Prussia, Russia and Austria made
the first partition of Poland there lived about thirteen mil-
lion Poles on about 400,000 English square miles. But they,
in their insane self -admiration, had overlooked that their
country, from end to end, was a flat, well-wooded prairie;
that there were no natural defenses; that their neighbors
had grown since 1500 from twenty millions to fifty millions,
and Poland, as the land of a nation, went under. To-day
they are sequestered among Germans and Russians, and only

199

in the Austrian part have they preserved a certain national
independence, but instead of the fifty millions that ought to
exist to-day as Poles, hardly twelve millions can be counted.
The "national spirit** is slowly amalgamating itself with that
of Germans and Russians. If the United States had any
dangerous neighbors, its illogical, absurd, unjust, insane sys-
tem of senate, its corpse-rule (United States Constitution,
made by men all dead long ago), might prove equally dan-
gerous. Even to-day through the senate a small majority
of only 12,000,000 citizens can control a majority of 50,000,-
000. All this is due to the insanity, illogicality of an-
cestor worship and ancestor government which considers the
United States Constitution an almost superhumanly wise doc-
ument, and has made its modification or improvement a prac-
tical impossibility; only during a war when eight states did
not vote, was one fairly vital amendment (the Fourteenth)
adopted, all other amendments are frivolous little "peanut
politics.** The insane logic of arithmetic that a minority of
equal things is more than a majority of the same finds expres-
sion in the United States Constitution, which requires for
a change a three-quarter majority of the states; that is to
say, it decrees that 1 shall be as great as 3 or, in
arithmetic, 1=3; for the one-quarter minority is
the real ruler. We have from this the almost incredible con-
dition that even a small minority can elect the president,
a majority of the senate, the Supreme Court (the real ruler
of the United States), and secure all the offices, control all
the resources of the land. If there existed real enemies,
it might involve the greatest danger. 12,000,0000 citi-
zens in 23 states may elect a majority in the senate,
against 50,000,000 in 21 states. It can be figured easily that
34 states, with only 26,000,000 inhabitants, (having, by the
Constitution, "absolutely equal rights'* with those voting
differently!!) can elect 224 electors (a majority), through
them secure the president, 68 senators (out of 88) and entire
control, and defeat a majority of 36,000,000. The campaign
of 1896 was precisely an illustration of this; the turning of
40,000 votes in four states would have given the power to an
unscrupulous minority, controlled by the wily silver mine
owners, who utilized this insanity (1=3) of our Constitution
to its fullest extent.

The English alphabet (do we say "ailphaibeet"?) is a grand
specimen of insanity^ a, e, i, y, are wrongly named in the
alphabet; the absurdity that the same letter may represent
four sounds is only found in English, also the absurdity
that a word of the same spelling may have to be pronounced
differently: Confer 1 read (I am reading), 2 read (I was
reading), 3 lead (I guide), 4 lead (a metal), 5 tear (product
of an eye gland), 6 tear (to pull asunder), etc.; 1 is a
misspelling, 2 a historic mispronunciation, 3 a misspelling,
4 a misspelling, 5 a mispronunciation, 6 a misspelling, etc. —
a case-hardened string of insanities; an insanity is an illogical
condition not improvable by logic.

Even in arithmetic and mathematics mild insanities have
crept in.

When is something absurd, and when insane? It is absurd
when combatable and amendable by good logic; insane when
logic appears to be of no avail to produce a reform; the two
shade into each other constantly.

Thus, the German writes decimal fractions with a comma,
3,4; do not use the period to split up 900,000,000, but only a
space, 900 000 000. In English 900.000. 087 is unclear, be-
cause it may mean nine hundred millions and eighty-seven, or
nine hundred thousand and eighty-seven one thousandths;
printers, to make it clear, frequently have to put the decimals
into smaller type. The French have here another oddity:
where the German writes 8,43 Mark, the American $8.43, the
Frenchman thinks his whole country insulted if you do not
write, 8 frcs. 43; the Frenchman is illogical, even insane,
in this petty detail, because he gets excited about it. The
German uses the period (.) very often for multiplication
mark, a reprehensible habit. The English (and Americans)
express division frequently by -^, an excellent method, be-
cause specific; the : being also used for proportions, as a
colon, and division, too many uses. The English (and Amer-
ican) decimal fraction .3 is absurd and not logical; the in
0.3 means something and cannot be omitted; in logarithms
even all P^nglish (and Americans) are forced to use the be-
cause .3 is no logarithm. The before the .3 makes all
decimal rules simpler and easier comprehended; all other
nations, five hundred millions, except the English who, in
England, use hardly any decimal fractions, and much less

201

in the United States than e. g. France, have the form 0.3;
it is more logical; arithmetic ought to be international, since
we all use already the same figures and signs. The English
(and American) : : for "therefore," "hence'^ is excellent, not
found in other countries. To the Non-Spaniard the inverted
interrogation and exclamation mark before a question and
exclamation looks "funny/^ yet it is not bad logic; it means
a notice: "I am going to ask you a question," thus: ^jHow
do you do? Answer: ; Very well!

One of the worst petty real insanities is the "insanity of
grandeur" of the French and United States people, not the
English in other countries, namely, to call a thousand
millions a billion. Up to the million we do not use a new
word until we have exhausted all the lower units.

Thus, the million has lower the 100,000, 10,000, 1,000,
100, 10; hence, logic demands that no billion be counted
until we have exhausted in counting millions the entire
register of figures less than one million; hence, 999 999-
000 000 is the last million; after that we would have to say
a million millions and for this we say, properly, a billion.
Thus, a trillion ought to be a billion billions, and the last
billion 999 999 999 999 000 000 000 000, after which would
follow the billion billions, or trillion. But even the other
nations are not consistent in this; they call every group of
six ciphers a new ion.

This confusion in arithmetic is very deplorable; French
and American writings are continually beclouded as to what
is meant; they are a small minority, only at best one hundred
millions against at least five hundred million civilized people;
and, besides, less logical in this than the others. To call a
million a figure with six ciphers and afterwards the addition
of only three ciphers a new ion, is not logical. In any figures
the author uses in this book he uses, consistently, the "Eng-
lish notation," that is, every six ciphers a new ion. The
calling of a smaller figure a grander name is typical of the
character of both nations — French and American. Let us
not be braggards; a thousand million is as easy to pro-
nounce, more logical, and not an international lie, as would
be the calling of 1,000,000,000 a billion. When the Franco-
German war of 1870-71 was concluded the Germans called for
an indemnity of five thousand million francs (about 980,-

202

000,000 dollars); the French called this sum five billions;
the Germans thought they were as much in the right of their
naming as the French were; actually a wrangle over words
was the result, and, as a consequence, a new word acceptable
to either was coined, "the milliard;" it has become some-
what popular and is understood all over the world. Until the
United States have a central authority for things to be
taught, the milliard (1,000,000,000) might be used to erad-
icate the false pretense ^T^illion." It is false pretenses to
give to a purely arithmetical word or measure a new exag-
gerated meaning, when those who originated it for us (the
English) meant something else by it and still use it thus;
it would be like calling the gallon a bushel; while no objec-
tion could be made as to the name, whether it be called a gal-
lon, a bushel, a hogshead, a ton, or a tuning fork, when used
in international intercourse it smacks of trade trick to call it
too much. The United States have taken over ninety-nine
per cent of their institutions, habits, customs, from England,
even the insane Fahrenheit thermometer; hardly anything
sensible from France, certainly not yet that logical metric
system, but the only absurdity found in the entire French
system the billion of only a thousand millions has found
favor! Queer are the antics of tribal insanity.

Medicine as a science and art is full of positive insanities.
The homoeopath who prescribes a 1-lOOth dilution supposes
one atom of his remedy mixed with the entire universe and a
pill made from a 1 : (lOO)th of the universe.

Remedies beyond the 20th dilution, even if made with
quart quantities, contain no longer one atom of the original
substance. Fortunately in medicine everybody only suffers
or gains in his own body, hence its vagaries, when not be-
coming compulsory, are harmless; the individual pays for his
ignorance, superstition, conceit; or faith, common sense,
courage bring their reward.

Eclecticism, Dosimetrism, Osteopathy, the now obsolete
Allopathy, etc., all are replete with absurdities, even insani-
ties.

One small peculiarity the author observed while the book
was being published, namely, the tendency of printers to
set figures in their word equivalent. "It is not considered
good style to have too many figures in a book." There

203

lurks behind this dread of figures, the youthful terror of
the boy who at 10, 12 and 14 years associated figures with
lessons. Let us be thankful for having figures which pre-
sent a unit to the eyes, not present in a long string of a, b,
c combinations; 2.7 is clear, incisive; *^two and seven-tenth*'
cumbersome, muddled.

As an improvement for figures with many places, the au-
thor suggests a naming, which has enabled him easily to
remember a vast number of figure data, not by the -ion form,
which has become muddled internationally, but by giving
the number of figures, or ciphers, and adding -al to it. Thus,
1,000,000 is seven grades of figures, hence one sevenal. In
French the term -ard, in German -nul (similar to -tel from
teil), in Italian -ardo, in Spanish -aso, in Eussian -ik : : might
answer; hence, a figure like 88,540,000,090,000,060,000,040,-
000, which may now be called according to difiEerent systems:

(a) consistent logical: 88 trillions, 854,000,090,000
billions, 60,000 millions, 40,000.

(b) English (continental universal), 88 quadrillions,
540,000 trillions, 90,000 billions, 60,000 millions,
40,000.

Would be —

885 twenty-fourals, 4 twenty-threeals, 9 seventeenals,
6 elevenals, 4 fivals.
Or—

8 twenty-sixals, 8 twenty-fiveals, 5 twenty-fourals, 4
twenty-threeals, 9 seventeenals, 6 elevenals, 4 five-
als.
And might be written —

8 (26), 8 (25), 5 (24), 4 (23), 9 (17), 6 (11), 4 (5),
where no arithmetical operations are to be performed,
merely data, dimensions, distances to be designated, thus:
8 (13) means 8,000,000,000,000, a saving of time and space.
In French —

885 vingt-quatrards, 4 vingt-troisards, 9 dix-septards,
6 onzeards, 4 cinquards.
In German —

885 vierundzwanzignul, 54 dreiundzwanzignul, 9
fiiebenzehnul^ 6 elfnul, 5 fiinfnul.

204

In Italian —

885 venti-quatrardi, 4 venti-treardi, 9 diecisettardi, 6

undiciardi^ 5 cinquardi.

Thus^ the distance of the nearest fixed star from our earth

is about 17 thirteenals of English miles. The area of the

earth is 2 ninals of English square miles, 5 sixteenals of

English square feet, 8 seventeenals of English square inches,

5 ninals square kilometers, 5 twenty-oneals square millime-
ters. The volume of water in the ocean is about 5 (21), 5
twenty-oneals cubic feet. The volume of the earth is 39 (23),
39 twenty-threeals cubic feet. The number of atoms of all
kind on our earth — our biggest terrestrial figure — is 6 (53),

6 fifty-threeals. The cubical contents of our visible uni-
verse are about 8 sixty-oneals of earth or 3 (96) of cubic
feet. If filled with atoms there would be in it 5 (115), 5 one
hundred and fifteenals, the highest figure we can logically
imagine to-day. Of course, figures beyond elevenals are al-
most beyond our grasp and realization.

All the cells of the human body are only about 105
thirteenals; although each is only about 1-2500 of an inch
in diameter, and although our entire body consists of nothing
but cells.

Strange to say, man has gone beyond the largest figure
thinkable within our universe. Thus, the figure w or the
one by which we must multiply the diameter to obtain the
circumference of a circle, was first called 22-7ths, then
355-113ths, then 3.1415926, later on the decimals were car-
ried to the one-hundredth place, and still later to the two-
hundred-and-fiftieth place. That this is not an exaggera-
tion can be seen by quoting only from one mathematical au-
thority (Hirzl) the correct figure:

=3.141592653589793238462643382795028849171693993-
75105820974944592307816406286208998628034825
34211706798214808651328230664709384460955058-
226136

The mathematician who figured it thus far required 680
pounds of paper and 1,540 days of work. Of course, for sell-
ing and trade purposes this accuracy is not very valuable,
but it is a feat full of deep significance. If we knew, e. g.,
the diameter of our earth accurately and used the figure
22-7ths to find the circumference we would be wrong by

205

11,026 feet, or about 2 miles too high; if we used 355-113ths,
we would be, by only 26 feet in the entire 25,000 miles, too
short; but if we used the figure up to 3.1415926536, we would
be only in doubt about 1-180 inch; the figure of 140 deci-
mals would give not only accuracy to single atoms, but even
so far beyond as to be accurate if we supposed an atom split
up into small parts, so small that they are in size to the
atom as the atom is in size to our sun! Hence, the person
figuring this w to 140 decimals went in his fancy into
realms beyond anything within our conception; we have to-
day even no theoretical or thinkable use on earth for it
beyond sixty-five decimals; the practical use, considering the
errors of our finest instruments, does not extend in the finest
astronomical work beyond 3.1415926536; 22-7th8 is only
wrong l-1200ths. To show the utter inability of
grasping high figures of "even mediocrily educated people,
we give an actual occurrence. There was a law in a state of
the United States, Illinois, which commanded the tax gath-
erer to sell certain property upon which the taxes were not
paid within a certain time, to the highest bidder in that man-
ner that he, who was satisfied with the smallest fraction of
ownership of the property thus placed on sale, was con-
sidered the highest bidder. Thus, on desirable property
worth $500,000 on which, perhaps, $100 taxes had not been
paid within the legal time, a certain person offered to pay to
the city $100 for one-thousandths of ownership; in this way
the city received its back taxes. But on some real choice
property the matter of any ownership at all was so valuable
that bidders bid one-millionth, one-billionth, one-trillionth,
etc., even up to one-vigintillionth! Of course, they specu-
lated that the owner of the other big fraction, the real owner
of the building, would pay them handsomely, much more
than the taxes, to have his property again all for himself,
free from ^^cloud.^' And — ^not strange to say if one knows the
personel of our courts — some courts held that one-vigintill-
ionth was a legally recognizable incumbrance. Now the law
cannot consider any values smaller than the smallest coin
which is legal tender, hence one cent is the lowest legal value,
because, while the mill exists in theory, none are coined.
A vigintillion is, according to international usage, 1 (120),
or one one hundred and twentyal; according to the French

206

and (United States) notation 1 (64), or one sixty-foural, or
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,-
000,000,000,000,000,000, 000.

Supposing the area of the estate, for which one vigintill-
ionth was bid to have been one square mile of the richest
city ground covered with twenty-story buildings valued at
$1,000,000,000 and bringing annually $100,000,000 rent,
what is the share of the one-vigintillionth owner? It is a
fraction of a cent so small that they do not include a single
atom of which there are in a cent (one-twentieth of a cubic
inch), 5 (27), 5 twenty-sevenals; there are in 1,000,000,000
dollars and 100,000,000,000 cents only 5 (39), or 5 thirty-
nineals of atoms, while he is only entitled to 1: 1 (66), hence
the atom has again to be split, as we split the 100,000,000,000
cents, and of these atomatoms the lucky bidder is entitled
to 10,000,000,000,000; but we have not yet seen an atom,
hence an atomatom is beyond us; he is, therefore, materially
not entitled for his vigintillionth to take away the least par-
ticle of dust on the property; a particle of the smallest dust
contains still 50,000,000,000 atoms, and he is not entitled to
a single one of them, but an ignorant court considered
this absurdly small amount a "cloud/' By means
-of micro-photography, we have seen structures 1: 5,000,000
millimeter (or one one hundred and twenty-millionths of an
inch in diameter), but this is still a mass capable of holding
10,000,000,000 molecules or atoms; hence, the molecule is
yet far off; the largest body we see is, perhaps, the star Sirius,
which is certainly more than one hundred times larger
than our sun; the quickest time moment measured has
been one five-thousandth of a second; the earliest well
proved human monument is the N"eander skull, but its
time is uncertain, probably more than 20,000 years
old; the oldest Chinese record of any kind dates about
8000 B. C., Babylonian 7000 B. C, Egyptian 5000
B. C, Etruscan 3000 B. C; some Mexican monuments
may have existed before Emperor Augustus, 30 A. D.
If we had any fixed ancient date to count from it
would be preferable to the present confusing B. C. and
A. D.^ if we were, e. g., to call our present year the year
101898 or 1001898 or 11898, all dates B. C. would be
well marked by containing many 9s, e. g., 999678 would be

207

the year of the battle of Cannae (322 B. C). Noah would be
recorded (if he existed at the time claimed) as living 996000;
the end of the ice period in North America would be about
991000; and a Lyrae, Vega, was polar star in 240000. All
chronology from a human event is not deep; it ought to be
from a phenomenal cosmic event like the formation of the
moon, etc.

But not only arithmetic, the science of geography,
which one might naturally suppose to be a fairly accurate
science, is just bristling with absurdities, insanities of all
kind.

The mapmaker realizes the difficulty of making an accu-
rate flat map of our earth, because our earth is a globe. If
it was not, if it was a disk, it would be very simple, but let
anyone try it; an orange peel cannot be spread flat without
tearing it, but the mapmaker does not want to tear his map,
hence he supposes the surface of the earth made of rubber,
and he cuts it open along a meridian and just stretches it
flat. The monstrosity thus resulting is called Mercator's
Projection, as glaring a lie as was ever put forward. On this
lie-^invented in 1700 — as if our age could not do better,
ancestor worship again! — Greenland is stretched into a con-
tinent twice the size of the United States; the southern
Arctic ocean is larger than the Pacific ocean; from west
Alaska to Greenland appears to be 12,000 miles, while the
real distance is 3,000 miles; from Peary sound to New York
appear to be 9,000 miles, while it is only 3,000 English
miles; from northern Alaska to San Francisco it appears to
be 4,000 miles, while from New York to Rio de Janeiro
only 3,800; the first distance is 3,000, the second 4,000 miles;
across Siberia a 'stretch of 13,000 miles is shown, in reality
there are only 4,000; in fact all distances, shapes and out-
lines are utterly false. Africa is proportionately shown
much too small and Asia much too large. A fairly true map
can only be constructed of what are called in geometry lunes
or diangles with breaks between them. The author gives
here a compressed true map and, to compare it, the so-called
Mercator^s Projection. The map in diangles does not show
East and West as straight directions, but as curves; only if
we stretch them near the edges do we get straight East and
West and a false map (No. 2). Comparing these correct

maps with the customary school maps will show, e. g., that
Canada is not nearly as large as usually depicted, that the
great Canadian northwest is not as large as the United
States west of the Mississippi, etc.

■n-a tt.oXi posiitlt.afjareiiHiji—

PelIhs "Mercator" Map, not a slnsle dlmenelon c
from South Greenland (□ Alaska three times too fai
too large; Menlco much too amall.

1 30 Em* 1 7H lies

Btralght E-W; the better, the r

Canada much smaller than the United States.

211

Another very crying abuse is the custom of mapmakers to
make mongrels out of geographical names. There is no ques-
tion that only the people living at a certain place have the
right of naming that place; thus, the German who makes Neu
York is wrong, but also the Englishman who writes Vienna,
Munich, Havana, Sandy Point (Puentas Arenas), is wrong.
The International Postal Union would do well to refuse
letters in translated proper names; proper local names tend
to preserve the liberty, diversity of the globe, and fight
against the levelling, dullifying, uniforming spirit of reaction
towards a phase of Pantheos of monotony; no nation has a
right to translate a proper name; they may pronounce it ac-
cording to their rules; if that is not the local pronunciation,
serves the local one right if it is not logical and sensible, but
the spelling, as long as common letters are used, must be
protected. Another element of geography is the census;
cities are gauged by inhabitants; every inhabitant claimed
above the true population constitutes a lie. In a chart pub-
lished by a famous firm, St. Paul is mentioned as a city of
146,000 inhabitants; as there are annually 1,100 deaths in the
city, the city has 1,100x50, or 55,000 inhabitants at the most
and 91,000 lies. . Does such a "census" inspire confidence in
any statement about such a town, state, or even the entire
country? Such false census figures in every state, enter the
entire state, even the total of the United States. From
the annual deaths, the population of the United States may
be figured as in truth about sixty-three millions in 1898, but
the census tries to prove over seventy million. Is that truth-
ful, trustworthy, and, therefore, progressive?

818

XX.
LANGUAGE.

Hardly any other form of human life is as teeming with
well marked phrases of Pantheos as is language; every word
has its ancestors back in the dim times when the goo, aw, ii
of the monkey and ape denoted already a difference between
a pleasure and a pain.

The study of language has enabled us to trace relationships
of nations otherwise utterly dark. Thus, the Anglo-Saxon
is found much more nearly related to the swarthy Hindoo
than he is to the fair skinned Jew, and more nearly related
to the latter than he is to the Hungarian.

Every single word has a history as interesting as that of
a nation, about every single word an entire book has been
written, if all the information about it were collected from
the different volumes into one.

Language transformed ape into man; it is the nurse of
our thoughts; without it they are only the vague, spasmodic
motions of young infants.

Language is the chief characteristic of nations; no real na-
tion without a distinctive language; political independent
units are incomplete without distinctive language. This can
be illustrated in the United States. We call our language
English, e. i., acknowledge right in this word our depend-
ence from England; we have no word for the units popu-
lating the United States. United Staters is a monstrosity;
Americans is not true, or, rather, correct; Yankees is a local
nickname, but by far the best word.

Hosts of incorrect terms are in the very names of nations;
thus, English is wrong in the very word, it should be Ang-
lish, French should be Prankish, German — either 6 (hard g
in go) -erman or Teutsch — not Deutsch, the latter is a Ger-
man blunder, Eussian is wrong, the word is Rossian, etc. It
may be said, without exaggeration, that every language would
not be a distinctive language if its errors of history, misspell-

213

ing and mispronouncing of the originally correct words were
eliminated; thus, English freed from these two chronic er-
rors becomes essentially French, built upon a weak Germanic
frame. French becomes a Latin, the Latin an Aryan, the
Aryan a ?; hence, all present European languages, freed from
error, becomes one ancient, not clearly defined language; it is,
therefore, errors which have developed languages, at least in
their diversity; an error in this sense is merely individuality
of pronunciation and spelling; individuality is due to the ac-
tion of liberty, hence all languages in their present diversity
owe their origin to the principle of liberty; without it they
would not exist, and it is precisely the same principle which
will further expand, develop, protect them. To-day any lan-
guage deserves only to be studied if it shows traits of super-
iority of logic, of usefulness which make its acquisition a gain
not a mere incumbrance. The good and bad points of the
modem dominant languages may be illustrated by supposing
an Arab who receives no aid from his native tongue studying
them, he becomes fairly proficient in the following number
of hours.

02 O ^ <1 S? ^

w^gU w3 wl Wg ws| s-

SogoTQ gg g- S|- 2 2:^

English 800 100 100 60 120 1180

German 10 600 250 120 50 1030

French 400 300 300 90 150 1240

Russian 100 1000 800 400 200 2500

Spanish 5 250 150 80 100 585

Italian 5 250 150 80 100 585

Rumanian 5 250 150 80 100 585

Chinese 1000 50 80 2000 800 3930

Japanese 400 200 400 1000 500 2600

The weakness and strength of any language is apparent
from this table. The traveller who visits the coast of the
Mediterranean is astonished at the extent to which Italian is
spoken there; the table shows why. Travelers from China to

Constantinople (McBraths) are astonished at the amount of
German found spoken by educated natives; the ease of learn-
ing its pronunciation and reading explains it; in Persia, Tur-
key, Sussia, interior China, Austria, Sweden, etc., German is
found much more frequently useful as a forced means of con-
versation than English or French. English suffers from one
vital absurdity by its misnomed alphabet. Plurality or ma-
jority rule of sounds should be the name of a letter. Let any
man take a page of printed matter and count the different
pronunciations and he will find that the five vowels should be

ah instead of ay,

eh instead of ee,

ih instead of I,

oh,

u (oo) instead of you.

i:=i (in right).

This error, in the alphabet, corrected, would deduct 400
hours of the 800 now needed for the mastering of its pronun-
ciation and spelling; and would slowly correct many thous-
ands of kakophonous detail pronunciations like the abomina-
ble "shun,^' "ble," "uh,'' forms of linguistic slurs. But no
"spelin refom" of the kind which would immortalize coarse-
est ignorance. German has its load of absurdities in its
grammar, cumbersome, flat, useless terminations, prepon-
derance of e (pronounce always eh) sounds, its vocabulary is
fine, very rich, original and flexible; its pronunciation very
simple, although sch for sh is cumbersome and ei for English
i (as in light) not logical; the future and past tense of its
verb and the passive voice are almost incredible heapings of
useless, turgid auxiliaries; they are the vilest language mon-
strosities found anywhere.

French has furnished to the world the poison of silent
letters; every word with a silent e bears the label ^^made in
France;" its spelling is absurd, the pronunciation not eu-
phonious, although rich in sounds; its vocabulary is very
limited, using a small stock of original Latin words over and
over; it has no specific language spirit, is a mongrel Latin;
the original Gaulic is hardly represented in its vocabulary;
the grammar is full of unnecessary relics of Latin agreement,
its verb is considerably superior to German, not as nicely

215

adjusted in the auxiliary, but superior in the auxiliaries to
English.

Eussian is the deification of a complex declension; there are
nine declensions, each with eight cases; prepositions govern*-
ing four or five cases, according to meaning; its verb is much
simpler than French or German, as much so as English; its
adjectives are rich, but require the same cumbersome agree-
ment used in French. It is a well sounding sonorous lan-
guage; the words are very long, few compound words exist;
where the Englishman says cow-bell the German says cowbell,
the French bell of a cow, the Eussian uses an adjective like
cowish bell or "vaccine'^ (?) bell; hence, the adjective be-
comes very important. Spanish, Italian and Eumanian are
practically Latin dialects; in Spanish the original Latin vow-
els are preserved, in Italian they become o or i, and in Eu-
manian (not Eoumanian) they become u; thus leone — lion —
in Italian, leo in Latin, is leu in Eumanian. All are sonorous,
simple, but only stocked with a limited ancient vocabulary;
none can form proper compound words like "congressman;"
they are all compelled to say "member of congress."

Chinese has no spelling, it is a drawing or sketching lan-
guage; originally every Chinese word sign was an abridged
picture of the object (in Chinese style) designated by the
word, but since 7000 B. C. the signs have been altered,
meanings changed, pronunciations become vague, so that to-
day, of the 200,000 Chinese words, hardly 5,000 represent
true pictures. It has no grammar to speak of, just as a rebus
or picture puzzle may be said to have no grammar, also its
syntax is limited to order of words; everything is stereotyped
expressions; Chinese is a picture gallery, reeled off from a
phonograph; hardly any individuality. As a language it has
no r, but innumerable nasal sounds and words which could
only be written with musical notations, thus: bah, bahahah,
bah-alh.

Japanese uses a syllable writing and the Chinese writing;
the first is more common, it resembles already much more
European types of language than Chinese. As to the pre-
dominance of sounds, it may be said that English is an uh
language, French an a language, German an eh language,
Eussian an o language, Greek (modern) an ih language, Ara-

21G

bic an ah language, Rumanian an oo (u) language, Chinese
an or u language.

An old saying, ascribed to Emperor Charles V. of Spain,
is this: "I speak Spanish with my God, Italian with my wife,
French with my mistress, German with my soldiers, and Eng-
lish with my grooms;" to-day he would have to say "English
with my merchants, mechanics, sailors and conquerors."

Considering the intrinsic good qualities of the five leading
languages, they may be said to be best fitted for these pur-
poses:
English:

International trade, business, mechanics, arts, naviga-
tion, because it has developed in these lines a clear
cut, short vocabulary, followed by German, Italian,
French.
German:

Geography, history, sciences, zoology, botany, chem-
istry, medicine, because it is the only language
which reproduces faithfully foreign words, names;
has a great wealth of generalizing, classifying,
grouping words from its own vocabulary; followed
by English, French, Russian, etc.
French:

Diplomacy, because the predominance of France, 1700
to 1870, developed a large special diplomatic vo-
cabulary, with many nice shadings; also for classic
literature, "high grade" novels, etc.
We have only to mention Shakespeare and Dickens to show
the strength of English in the two extremes of highest stage
art and most prosaic of daily life fiction expressed in lan-
guage.

For singing, the author would assign to the different lan-
guages the following places, beginning with the highest:
Swedish, Spanish, Russian, Italian, Rumanian, French, and
after quite a distance English and German close together,
only Arabic, Ilollandish, Danish and Chinese seem to be less
melodious yet.

The question of a world's universal language has .come up
repeatedly. There is little doubt that, while it might be of
certain advantage in buying some pork, or sausage, or beer,
it would be a great loss to the intellectual stock of humanity

217

to have languages levelled again to one monotony. No other
means do we know so excellently suited for studying our
own language than the study of a. foreign language; while
translating we are compelled to study closely the different
shadings of, in general, similar words; with every language we
learn we acquire a new intellectual character. Everybody can
observe it on himself. While he talks English he^ moves his
hands little, when talking German he gesticulates a good
deal, and when talking French he plays his eyebrows and
shoulders, and becomes almost an actor.

Translations are only tolerable where the subject is of
primal importance, the diction of none, or if we belong to
the unfortunate ninety-five per cent who don^t realize that
English is not spoken by Italian children in Italy, or French
within American families. All translations which represent
the natives of a country speaking in a foreign language
among themselves, are ridiculous, funny comicalities. A
Shakespeare in French when Eichard III. shouts: "Un che-
val, Un cheval, mon royaume pour un cheval!" is a serio
comic farce. A Zola in English a hair-raising obscenity,
Goethe in English or French is an unbearable, turgid con-
voliitedness of circumlocutory involution of cerebro-intel-
lectual difficulties; a German poem, which makes General
Pickett, at Gettysburg, shout to his men: "Vorwarts Siid-
lander;" is stunning in its absurdity. Every educated person
of college grade should master, so as to be able to read, at
least two modern languages; the labor of learning them is
manifold returned in their enjoyment. But languages
should be studied more with the aim of entering into their
spirit, not with a view to some vulgar: zweibier, unbock,
una bottiglia, votka, etc.; the commercial superficial element
of every language can easily be mastered in one month.

The dominion of languages does not at all depend on their
intrinsic (Jualities, but on the political predominance of the
races speaking them. Thus, Spanish and Italian, even Celtic
and Hindustani, are intrinsically superior to English, but
they disappear before it. The battle of a world's language
becomes entirely a political one. Among the possibilities
to-day are:

English — at present large territory covered by it;

Eussian — most compact mass of users;

218

Chinese — most numerous political unit;

French — extensive use in travels;

Latin languages — considerable territory covered, intrinsic
merit;

Arabic — great territory covered by it;

German — compact, intelligent, progressive race.

The real fight seems to lie between Russian and English,
not the English in England and the colonies, but the English
in the United States. Russia is not attackable with present
means; marching from Siberia into China, no nation can
stem her; only China, herself, if she awakens, and then the
world might have to learn Chinese. The ultimate outcome
may be that Russia will be master of China. India cannot
be held by England, against the Chinese armies commanded
by Russian generals, backed by hundreds of thousands of
Caucasian Russians. Asia with her eight hundred millions
will be Russian. Westward, there is only one bulwark against
Russia and that is Germany; nothing seems a more short-
sighted policy than that of England to do anything to
alienate Germany; for, while Germany can aid Eng-
land most materially, England can help Germany hut
very little; hence, for England to play all-hog and for a few
patches of sand in Africa or Eastern Asia to offend rulers
and people of Germany, seems to be the height of folly. Ger-
many is England's natural center on the continent of Eu-
rope; no other nation is as valuable to her, as sympathetic,
as little aggressive, and, withal, as independently strong;
the fate of India will not be decided on the Ganges, but on
the Vistula, not by the ships, but by- the armies, and the
armies of England may suffice for Zulus, Ashantis, even Se-
poys, Dervishes, they will be too small against Russia; qual-
ity is excellent, but quantity must support it.

Austria alone would crumble, but imder the vigorous help
of Germany would prove a powerful ally, and, together, they
oppose one hundred million to Russia one hundred and
thirty million, of which fifty million are scattered over an
immense territory. But, the ultimate outcome may be that
Asia will be Russian, unless China should awaken, in which
case Asia might be Chinese; Russia has found a foothold al-
ready in Africa (Abyssinia); master of Asia, no nation
could defend Africa against her, only the climate. With

219.

the resources of Asia and Africa at her disposal and a Rus-
sian Alexander on her throne, an invasion of Alaska, Cana-
da, California, with 1,000 ships and 2,000,000 men would be
nothing impossible. Could, by that time, say 1990, the
United States, with 200,000,000 people stem the attack of
the one thousand million Russians? If not, Russia is mas-
ter of the world, and the present ^Tiow do you do?" heard
from north pole almost to south pole, from Greenwich to
Calcutta, would be a "kak yest vasha sdarabyeh?" Eng-
land, deprived of India, could no longer stand the expense
of a navy large enough even to compete with France or
Germany, not to speak of Russia then. But, before England
could be attacked the western barrier of Russia would have
to be broken. There is a struggle for very existence coming
between the Germanic mass in Central Europe and the
Slavic empire;* now the advantage is still with the about
eighty millions of Teutons in Germany, Austria, Switzer-
land, Belgium, Holland, perhaps aided by the Scandina-
vian Teutons, allied with twenty million Hungarians, Ro-
manese and Rumanians. But Austria is already honey-
combed with the Slavic sappers; the Bohemians, Poles, Croa-
tians, Ruthenians, will be but treacherous allies. Hence,
the final blow for Russians political supremacy will be struck
in Central Europe; for the French, Italians and Spaniards
will be toys and playthings after the Teutonic center is bro-
ken; the decisive moves in the game of chess of supremacy
of language, however, will be made in China and India.
The most foolish move of England and the United States
is to weaken Germany. Arabic could only become the lan-
guage of the world although to-day spoken by at least
eighty millions of people and used in prayer by fifty millions
more, if a disease fatal to all but Negroes and Hindoos should
depopulate Europe and Asia and America, even then the
Negroes of the United States might succeed in maintaining
English. Spanish has not even the hope of Arabic; even
in South America it has to divide territory with Portuguese;
even the four languages of Italian, Spanish, French and Por-
tuguese united are not dangerous competitors of English.
French was given a fine start in the last century, and by
Napoleon I., but it proved itself inadequate to the emer-
gency; the French do not multiply fast enough. It seems

220

absurd even to mention German among possibilities of a
world's language because of internal enemies^ chief of
which is the natural little pride the German takes in his
language^ also because we do not consider German as a lan-
guage intrinsically deserving victory; it has too many frills
of two hundred years ago about it, would cost in time at
least ten per cent more than English for all intercourse, and
with its predominant eh sounds is not sonorous; confer the
word Peldwegeverbesserungsrechtspflege, while even short-
er than the English equivalent "Execution of the laws for
the improvement of field paths,^' or thirty-two letters Ger-
man against forty-seven in English; it is not euphonious,
because of the presence of nine e's (pronounce eh), only
one u, against aeiou in English. But, if England, with
only twelve million population in 1700 colonized and sub-
sequently conquered the world, Germany might duplicate
the feat with her sixty million. The Teutons once, 200 A.
D. to 600 A. D., conquered all Europe; Spain was inhabited
by the Western Goths; Prance is still named after the pure-
ly Germanic Franks; England and the United States are in-
habited to-day by one-half of the descendants of the Saxons,
the other half stayed around Hamburg and are to-day good
Plattdeutsche. Even the Normans were Teutons gallicized.
Eastward the Teutons broke against the immense forests
and the climate of Russia, but the Ostrogoths ruled Con-
stantinople and Greece for three centuries, while the Van-
dals ruled Africa from Gibraltar to Tunis. Their language
died, however, in the simpler language of the conquered;
Spanish has in its mucho (much) and about two hundred other
words a very poor remnant of Gothic. French, almost solely
terms of war and of chase. Almost as complete as is the ex-
tinction of the Teutonic language in France, Spain and Italy,
is that of its blonde type of men and women; in Northern
Italy one finds but rarely a blonde adult, although frequently
blonde children. But German cannot be entirely omitted
because of the high intellect of its people, their number, fer-
tility, wealth, political influence and strength. There is,
no doubt, that of the four races English, Eussian, German,
and, perhaps French, that nation which secures first and
holds as a monopoly the first successful aerial propulsion
machine, will conquer the world almost without a fight;

221

every other nation would have to bow to the one which could
land in a few days on any spot of the globe an overwhelming
number of first-class soldiers; especially Germany would be
dangerous and England not any better defended than Spain.
The different languages are spoken to-day aboiit by

S^ ^i S3 Sg ^S gS gS:^^

• hJ • • •

•

Mother tongue... 105 110 85 50 88 60 300 45

In intercourse of
business, parlia-
ments, travel... 400 140 100 75 100 110 400 60

The vocabulary, in words, of each of these languages is
about —

Common peonle: English, 500; Russian, 700; German,
800; French, 400; Neo Latin, 350; Arabic, 500; Chinese,
1,500; Japanese, 1,200.

Educated people: English, 15,000; Russian, 10,000; Ger-
man, 20,000; French, 10,000; Neo Latin, 9,000; Arabic,
2,000; Chinese, 25,000; Japanese, 20,000.

Best writers: English, 35,000; Russian, 25,000; German,
90,000; French, 20,000; Neo Latin, 25,000; Arabic, 4,000;
Chinese, 80,000; Japanese, 90,000.

In largest encyclopaedia dictionaries: English, 280,000;
Russian, 90,000; German, 360,000; French, 60,000; Neo
Latin, 80,000; Arabic, 20,000; Chinese, 300,000; Japanese,
400,000.

The apparent great differences lie in the ability or ina-
bility of the different languages to form compound words;
thus, the English word ^letter-press'^ is questionable as to
being considered a specific word, but the German briefpresse
is not questionable, it is a specific word; the French, Rus-
sian, Neo Latins, have no compound words, they have to use
old words to say "a press for copying letters,^' hence do not
get the credit of the specific compound word; a compound
word is to be considered as a distinctive, legitimate word
when it designates a single object or idea of a specific charac-
ter; thus, sea-plant, salt-cellar, salt-pan, are specific, single-
idea words, but not salt pork.

222

Xowhere hag the inconsisteDcy of English done more dam-
age than in Geography; all names with ee, oo, are misspelled.
Geographical names ought to be si^elled by an interna-
tional code which allows to give the true spelling, or where
only a local pronunciation exists, the latter, so that educated
people in any nation will read the name practically identi-
cally. For all Caucasian names the spelling of the inhabi-
tants is the only admissible one. For other names the fol-
lowing alphabet has already been recommended by geograph-
ical societies, to which the author would add a few sugges-
tions: The same alphabet serves to write all foreign words
correctly internationally.
Vowel sounds:

a (Engl ah); e (Engl eh); i (Engl ih, it, is); i (English

i in bite); o (English o); u (Engl oo).
a (Englai); o (Engls(i)r); ii (French u, Bussian 61,

no English sound).
3 English uncertain e like clever=clevD); a (English

aw).
Si (French en, Portuguese k); i (French in); o
(French on); e (French un).
These four a sounds are especially common in Chinese,
e. g., what is spelled in English Wang Foo — unpronouncable
to French, Germans, Eussians, etc. — should be spelled Wa
Fu.

y always the sound as in you.
Consonants b, d, f, h, k, 1, m, n, p, r, s,
t, V, w, X, y, about like English:
g always hard, as in go;
j always as in join;

qu always as in English, not French or Spanish (k);
z always z as in English, not in German ts; the Ger-
man z is a compound letter ts;
ch always ch as in German; the ch of English sound

(charm) best by the -analysis tsh;
8h = sh as in English;

sch not to be used, it is the English sh spelled clum-
sily in German;

^ . =:cluck in English, "Schnalzer'' in German (in Zulu

and African languages).
If , f= = a whistle;

(^i, =Greek with sound of English th; the th should
be what it is written t=h.

223

8'J'?'-^'^*^?t,2.]t ' '^V^'^^^^. i"- wasvcai tcritis.tKe Telolive Len^rfv of Utters.
i « theCnjlim'itW*, i .in'rlver'^L intri"(rrc€)^mFT«ncH-'t^'^a. .clkiailimiihedLadmirin^)
3k (5in.aineie)i*> J , >I iriwr) . g^ . «^^cO^ .- Q^ .J is t^VC »vaiaL of U in "W ;C0iT€cUl|b3l-

Especially the last line shows how — ^first — ^by this
system the — at present unprintable — Chinese may be
printed perfectly. Of course, these nice shadings would
only be used in grammars or on correct geographical maps.

Of course, such details like four sh in Arabic are really
not essential; we do well enough if we write the name
close enough so that it is not pronounced vitally wrong.
Thus, e. g., the city of Calcutta is a wrong name, invented
by the Portuguese; the natives call their town Kalikut.
Chee-foo is an English horribility for Tshi-fu, etc. Chee-foo
would be pronounced by five hundred million of people in
eighty different languages uniformly as Kay-ay-foh-oh; the
latter, (Tshi-fu), by all of them except the French, correctly;
hence, one hundred million people with one language try
to domineer five hundred with eighty languages.

XXI.
EVOLUTION.

This ancient doctrine — Buddhism contains in its peculiar,
turgid, involved, would-be mysterious, clumsy language
many of its tenets — has found most able modern expounders,
between 1859 and 1880, in Charles Darwin, Huxley, Tyndall,
Haeckel, and an enormous number, in reality the vast ma-
jority of all competent professors and students of zoology,
biology, palaeontology, anatomy, etc., all over the world. With
the exception of some French scientists from motives of na-
tional jealousy and ancestor worship (Cuvier) and a few iso-
lated teachers in denominational school whose hunger for
the daily bread exceeds that for progress, all those compete-
tent to judge have accepted Darwin's theory. Who is compe-
tent in this question? Evidently, only a student of natural
sciences; no professor of theology, heraldry, history, phila-
tely, rhetoric, etc., unless he has given one-half of his lifetime
to the «tudy of sciences aside of his special calling.

Popular notion, of course, which worships ancestral trees
showing how the present family of good butchers, bakers.

224

shopkeepers have gone downward to the present condition
from some Sir Knight of King Edward's times; funny news-
papers, women whose whole stock in trade is the ridiculous
distinction between "woman" and "lady" ornamented with
some cutch and alizarine dyed rags, has made this strong
theory still very unpalatable to the lower 98 per cent of the
intellectual masses; priests who want to live well and domi-
neer have to lean on Moses; with him stands and falls their
living, calling, respectedriess, power, dominion; but all these
are low phases of the Pantheos of intellect with which we
need not concern ourselves.

The chief demonstration of Darwin or his followers by in-
numerable detail proofs is the logicon: "All animals are
descendants of ancestors a little different from them and
slightly lower in their adaptation to surrounding conditions."
This logicon, carried into long epochs of time, leads to the
conclusion that all species of all animals — ^and man is a full
animal — ^are descendants of common ancestors. These ap-
pear in the following historical order:

1. Man, together with the Chimpanzee, Orang, Gorilla, is
the descendant of apes, 3 species, about 50,000 years ago.

2. The apes are descendants of the lemurs, 8 species,
? 200,000 years ago.

3. The lemurs are descendants of other mammals, 25
species, ? 600,000 years.

4. The mammals are descendants of the now extinct di-
nosaurians, 90 species, ? 1,000,000.

5. The dinosaurians are descendants of batrachians (frog
family), 60 species, ? 400,000.

6. The batrachians are descendants of fishes, 50 species,
? 300,000.

7. Fishes are descendants of lampreys, 10 species, ?
3,000,000.

8. Lampreys are related to the ascidians (molluscs), 40
species, ? 8,000,000.

9. The molluscs are descendants of amoebae and monerae,
100 species, ? 15,000,000.

Direct observation beyond this point is lacking, but good
logical analogies are not lacking to continue the series into
the very elements. Chemists have succeeded already in pro-
ducing alcohol, urea, sugar, lecithine (an elementary com-

225

pound of our brains), fats, even albumen out of the very ele-
ments. Should "nature/^ e. i., the Pantheos of the Earth, be
less capable of producing in ages what his product, man, pro-
duced in a few weeks or months? We cannot yet make
1,000 carat diamonds, but we can produce one-tenth carat
stones; cannot produce granite mountains, but can make in
4 months scales of mica, feldspar and hornblende, simply be-
cause our laboratories and means as compared with those
of the Pantheos of our Earth are too microscopic, limited,
etc. Especially in regard to time, we have only seconds at
our disposal where nature has centuries; hence, the following
tenets follow as thoroughly logical:

10. The amoebae are descendants of ancestors coming
from albuminoua compounds, 100 species, 20,000,000 years.

11. The albuminous compounds are products of the Pan-
theos of the Earth made from its mineral constituents by
the combined action of heat, affinities, "time'' upon the
chemical elements, 3,000,000 years.

The figures, e. g., 8 species, merely indicate very roughly
how many species intervene between the present species and
its ancestors connecting it with the next lower series; they are
mentioned merely to give to the non-technical reader an
approximate idea of the gap; the number of years are of
course only relative, starting from the fairly approximate
50,000 years for man as a basis and taking into account the
ages, thickness and depths of the geological strata in which
remnants are found. Thus it will be found that there are
about 500 species of distinctive character from man to the
albuminous compounds requiring some 50 millions of
years; we know that even nowadays it takes a long time
to form a species; the most characteristic distinctive trait of
two species is probably that of differences in sexual organs
so deep that the union of two representatives produces no
longer an offspring; this shows that to-day hardly ass and
horse are distinctive species as yet, because the mule exists,
has even produced offspring of mule father and mule mother,
although in exceedingly rare instances. Hence, we have
here an illustration of the very moment of species becom-
ing distinctive. Horses have been bred for 5,000 years, but
still all varieties are fertile when crossed among each other,
no species has yet developed. All races of men are yet fer-

226

tile among themselves, but not gorilla and chimpanzee, chim-
])anzee and monkey; man and orang have been proved to be
fertile to each other.

We often hear of great gaps, "missing links/' There exist
some; there are missing, e. i., not yet found:

No. 1 needed about 4 species, missing 2.

No. 2 needed about 8 species, missing 3.

No. 3 needed about 25 species, missing 5.

No. 4 needed about 90 species, missing 80.

No. 5 needed about 60 species, missing 55.

No. 6 needed about 50 species, missing, 40.

No. 7 needed about 10 species, missing 3.

No. 8 needed about 40 species, missing . 10.

No. 9 needed about 100 species, missing 30.

No. 10 needed about 100 species, missing 100.

Hence, the great gaps are not in No. 1, where the public
hopes for them most, but in 4, 5, 6, 10. Let us be glad that
there are some unexplored fields.

That man belongs to the ape family cannot be reasonably,
logically even disputed. The evidence of this tenet, consist-
ing of the likeness, identity, similarity of 1,500 muscles, mil-
lions of cells, every single bone, all arteries, veins, intestines,
hairs, hairglands, etc., in man and apes is more overwhelm-
ing than even the evidence that our earth revolves about the
sun, or that King James I. ever existed. As the detail of
this has been treated far better by C. Darwin, E. Haeckel
and others than we could do, we only note here the conclu-
sion. Aside of this general analogy of structure 4 grand
sciences exist which prove the general tenet beyond reason-
able doubt.

1. Embryology: Every being (man not excluded) de-
velops from an egg, the differences are only in size, that of
man is about as large as that of a squirrel, but much larger
than that of the oyster; under the microscope they look
practically all alike. Have you any better explanation of
that phenomenon than Darwin's theory?

2. Every being (man included) passes, during its develop-
ment, until it is born, through a series of very odd shapes
which are abridged shapes of what their ancestors passed

227

through; thus the human child (and ape child) at one time
has 3 gills like newts, a little later a fine fur over the entire
body; from the -Ith to the 20th week the human child
embryo has a tail exactly as long as that of a dog of a few
w^eks of age and curled exactly alike. It is impossible to
distinguish at certain stages the embryo of man from that of
a dog, a horse, a chicken or even a turtle; the embryo of man
at a certain stage has a very large mouth like a fish, etc.
Only a few striking features are picked out. Have you any
theory at all to offer explaining these observations except
Darwin's?

Palaeontology: The remnants of ancient animals are not
found mixed, apes and saurians, birds and trilobites to-
gether, but in a certain order; the oldest strata contain the
simplest animals — eozoon Canadense a mollusc; less old ones
more complex animals (trilobites) and thus upward within
the strata, the petrified animals approach more and more
our world as the strata are younger; only in Trias did the
saurians develop highly to die out almost entirely in the
Chalk age. Have you any other theory to account for this
order except Darwin's?

The remnants of odd animals have been found; thus the
horse has been traced from our present one-toe animal to a
two-toed, three-toed, four-toed and five-toed animal in grad-
ual stages. Birds with teeth in their beaks and lizard tails
have been found, evidently most marked "missing links."
The dinosaurians have characteristics of lizards, frogs and
mammals mixed.

Comparative anatomy: A dry science without guesswork
about it; we find, e. g., that all higher animals have five
fingers on each hand (for the thumb is anatomically a fin-
ger), each of four little bones except the thumb, that all of
them have five toes on each foot, sometimes a few only little
developed; thus the unborn colt has five well marked toes;
the seal has five toes which in later life grow together, but
the bones remain separate; man has even the pouch of the
marsupialians in a modified form; man has the same num-
ber of vertebrae as the apes, etc.; every single muscle traced
through the different species leads to the same conclusion:
Darwin's theory is the only and best explanation offered.

Rudimentary organs: Why has man muscles of the skin

228

to shake it like horses^ but cannot do it? Darwin says:
"Kemnants of ancestors." Why have we the vermiform
process? To allow operations for appendicitis? No, ^^he-
cause our ancestors needed it and it could not be abolished
at once. \^Tiy have we the coccyx? To sit upon it and in-
jure ourselves dangerously? No; it is the ancestral legacy
of a tail. Why have soft, fine hair on the body? — Ancestral
legacy. Thus, numerous muscles which we do not use now
are legacies from our ancestors, even small bones, nerves, etc.
Have you any other explanation to offer?

But we need not even go to sciences to prove the con-
stant improvement from ancestor to descendant. Compare
the American to-day with the Anglo-Saxon of 500 A. D.,
compare his civilization, education, manufactures, tele-
graphs, telephones with the beacon fires of the old Anglo-
Saxon; compare our refinement with their coarseness; con-
tinue the comparison, compare the Anglo-Saxon of 500 A. D.
(or 1,400 years ago) with the race again 1,400 years ago or
900 B. C; we get already something approaching the Digger
Indian; add again a gap of 1,400 years, or the year of 2300
B. C, another, another, another and another and we have
7000 B. C, or the glacial period in Europe and America; go
back five more such groups and we come near the time 14000
B. C, when we may place the beginning of written language,
add 14,000 years more and we reach very nearly the time
at which about man ceased to be pure ape, began to talk and
started out as a wretched, fearful collection of utterly savage
tribes. The formation of tribes marks the beginning of man;
apes have little marked tribal ideas; tribe developed lan-
guage, morals, education, intellect, weapons, tools,. machinery
and — modern man. When men grouped themselves into
tribes the difference between Negro, Caucasian, Mongolian
and Malay was already marked; the South American Indian
is a Malay, the North American a' cross of Malay and Mon-
golian. In some of the present African tribes we get a fairly
good representation of man of 40000 B. C. European man of
10000 B. C. already made rude sketches like that of a mam-
moth on a tusk, discovered 20 years before present man
found that mammoths had a long fur; this sketch shows that
fur. The Chinese tribes began writing some 7,000 years be-
fore Christ; the Assyrians about 6000 B. C; Egyptians about

229

5000 B. C, in spite of the fact that by Jehovah mythology
they were created only 3,000 years before Christ. But Dar-
win's theory is more a historical theory, it only introduces as
causal theory the "survival of the fittest ;'' to explain how
the fittest grows; the deep reason of the development of
man in the lines of present civilization rather than, e. g., the
ant or the bird tribe is not part of the theory. That part is
as yet hidden within the Pantheos of Destiny. Man thus
developing is the development of the Pantheos of Humanity
rather than of Insect ity or of Ornithy (bird world). As hu-
manity we are antagonistic even to-day to monkeydom, to
caninity, ornithy or the development of any other group of
animals representing a type. Humanity as such is a sub-
phase of the Pantheos of our Earth. When man has reached
his maximum, and this maximum is not the best the earth
can produce, the Pantheos of Destiny holds within its dark
waves the destruction of man and repeopling of the earth
with another type which may go nearer to perfection.

Even to-day within the same race a slow progress of sep-
aration takes place; the English language of the common
people with its vocabulary of 400 words would be utterly
inadequate to the requirements of science; scientific English
is practically a different language and within the race the
two classes, common and educated people are forming. Will
they go further apart or reunite again? In French the dis-
tinction is less marked; in German a little more marked than
in French, but less than in English; in Russian strongly
marked. Fortunately, constant intermarriages mingle the
common and educated people and the Hindoo caste system is
not a probability of the future.

Those silly society, not-in-society, etc., cliques are all very
superficial, foolish distinctions, strange to say, frequently in-
sisted on by otherwise sane intelligent beings, mostly women,
of course. The owner of silken, cotton and woolen frivoli-
ties, of horses, dogs, houses and wealth will be the beggar of
to-morrow. Into his coffin he takes nothing and will emerge
with his real qualities; but refinement and harmony of body
and soul are the tests of the real nobility of the world from
emperor to tramp; these are taken into our graves and re-
appear with us.

The struggle for survival of the fittest — superior might be

230

better — is even fiercer to-day than in savage times. All our
conditions are more complex, requiring a more complex su-
periority than ever; even between nations the question is
not only survival in war and battle, but survival in the battle
of wealth, industry, sobriety, economy. The battle is be-
tween many phases of Pantheos for survival; while they are
all immortal they fight against absorption or enslavement.
Thus, about 300 A. D. the Pantheos ("spirit") of Ireland
made its first step for extinction by accepting a foreign re-
ligion (Christianity). Its priests considered the language of
the people (Celtic) inferior to their Latin; the people- had
"weak patriotism" and yielded; the Irish language lost one
province; from 700 until 1600 the national spirit spent itself
in internal wars; before the Irish realized it, the English
crowded into the land; the Irish language began to be spoken
only by the conquered, slowly this most important branch of
nationalism crumbled in the fight for survival of the fittest.
The English language as compared with the Celtic appealed
to laziness; it is simpler and, as the English did not learn
Irish, the Irish had to learn English; to-day an Irishman is
merely a Catholic Englishman born in Ireland or anywhere
else. Irish is merely an empty word with historic reminis-
cences which will die; every nation, by abandoning first its
specific creed, habits, dress, morals, then its language, be-
comes extinct as a nation. No complete nation exists with-
out a distinctive language of its own; mere land boundaries
do not suffice, although they may suffice politically. The
Poles may follow the Irish, the Turks the Poles, the Mexi-
cans may follow the Turk, the Hollanders the Mexican, etc.
Where are the Esthonians to-day? Only 30 years ago the
last one died who spoke the languag.e of that once mighty
tribe on the Baltic. Some races are tenacious; the Basque
preserved his race, although not his independence, for 2,000
years at least, because he clung to his language; the Romansh
in Switzerland speak to-day a Latin; the Rumanians are over
8 million descendants of an old Roman colony on the lower
Danube; it is language which held them together; hence
true patriotism emphasizes the vitality of the national lan-
guage.

But the struggle for survival of the fittest is not only

231

within bodies, tribes and nations, it also rages among Egos,
souls, thoughts, ganglia, muscles and organs.

Brama only survives because he met no foe mightier;
Christianity is not dangerous to him; rationalism or Panthe-
ism may be. Pronounce any thought: Humanity as a mass
is working towards uniformity, — an idea; the nation is sub-
ordinate to humanity — an idea; an international telegraph
code would be desirable — ^an idea, and you will find ideas
meeting ideas antagonistic to them, engaged in the struggle
for life of ideas.

Each idea represents a phase of Pantheos or group of
phases, it appears now, goes under, reappears again, goes
under again, and so on. It may be said all are possible of
realization somewhere and at some time, but for the time
being one must temporarily die, the other survive.

XXII.

THE FAMILY RELATION FROM PANTHEISTIC

STANDPOINT.

From the moment we are conceived our family relations
as individuals begin; at first as children in somebody's else
family, then as heads and founders of our own families.
The family relation gives our most powerful impressions
Every man who has met with a personal misfortune counts
this less than his family troubles. The author once met an
intelligent cripple. "I would not mind to be maimed, but
I can never get a wife and family." The family is the unit
next higher to our own self. Its purposes are more complex,
more exalted than those of self; still higher is the nation;
higher yet religion, and still higlier humanity. It is curious
to observe the attitude of our sentiments towards these
higher units. A civilized man dies for his own defense re-
luctantly, only if driven into a corner without any other out-
let than to kill or to be killed. A civilized and entirely cour-

232

ageous man is no fool. He does not value the robbery of a
few dollars higher than his life, unless the principles of jus-
tice or humanity become glaringly involved. But, if his
family is in ever so slight a danger, from lion and cat to
man, every animal is ready to fight to death; the family
principle is valued higher than life; if his tribe and country
are in danger he forgets self, leaves his family in misery,
to perhaps die in an unknown land to be thrown into an un-
known grave with no "earthly^' reward whatever. Are we
not compelled logically to suppose that within the Pantheos
of the Nation those heroes will find their reward? Still more
penetrating is the Pantheos of Eeligion or, to be more cor-
rect, of "ideals of the soul.'' Men of the same nation have
fought among themselves in the face of the common politi-
cal enemy, because one set believed Christ to be present in
a wafer as a symbol, the other believed that the wafer be-
came actually the flesh and blood of Christ by some magic
of a priest, a third set believed that the entire communion
was only a historic celebration (Lutherans, Catholics, Evan-
gelicals). This is an actual episode in the 30 years' re-
ligious war in Germany (1618-1648). Ideals and religion are
higher than nationality; the Irish Catholic is far more hos-
tile to the Irish Protestant — Orangeman — than he is to the
Italian Catholic. When in races nationality and religion
both are opposed, then wars are fierce. Thus Catholic
France is a fiercer enemy of Protestant Germany than Cath-
olic Austria to Catholic Italy. But this higher phase is more
properly termed the phase of Dominant ideals. Wars have
been fought for purely personal insults — war of the "two
queens and a courtisan against a king," 1755 to 1763 (7
years' war). The war of the rebellion was a war for ideals.
But higher yet than religion and those ideals is "humanity."
Let a child fall into the water: the youth, the married man,
the Catholic, Protestant, Japanese, secessionist and unionist
do not hesitate, they do not enquire: Is the child handsome
or related to me, or is it Catholic or any other religion?
They plunge in and give up their lives to save it; frequently
the child intrinsically is not worth saving, no matter. Hu-
manity impels and the deed is done. A very striking ex-
ample happened on an ocean liner. A child fell overboard
(there was even well grounded suspicion of intent on part of

23^

the mother), a passenger, young, brilliant, rich, newly mar-
ried, in sight of his bride, jumped into the water; the ship
was stopped, a boat lowered, child and rescuer picked up;
but, alas, the rescuer died and the child lived, only to die
two days later from tuberculosis, with which it had Seen
afflicted a long time and would have died anyway. Was that
child worth saving? In itself by no means, but the principle
of sacrifice for humanity was worth the life of the rescuer and
he will have nothing to regret, except his lack of harmony.
It is strange that the duty appears the higher the less per-
sonal pleasure we derive from it. Our self and family give us
more pleasure than nation, ideals, or least of all, humanity,
but we will sacrifice each foregoing lower unit to the follow-
ing higher one. Notoriously ungrateful is humanity; its re-
wards are fame (limited), wealth (rarely), and the life after
death in the memory of the surv^iving; but the visible re-
wards are much less clearly defined than those of the spirit
of nationalism, even of religion and ideals. Our histories are
full of warriors and martyrs, but refer only sparingly to the
heroes of humanity — Father Damien. There must be in
prospect a very high reward. It is not illogical to think
that the Pantheos or spirit of humanity gives this reward
in, so to speak, a mortgage on an extra high existence earned
by sacrifice of the present one. All Pantheos phases are
lavish in rewards, that of humanity will not be less so.
While the one who died for the nation may survive in the
minds of those reading our histories, the one who died for
humanity may have proved himself fitted to enter the very
Ego of the phase of humanity and be a great lord over many
common ordinary Egos. Many of our at present seeming
accidents of high power (ex-Pres. Cleveland, Nicolas II. of
Eussia, Queen Victoria, etc.), may be nothing else but re-
wards of the Pantheos of Humanity operating through the
complex connections, between Egos, parents and family.
We will understand family better, if we never lose sight of
the lower and higher units as elaborated in chapter 8.

The family is a charming arrangement* to raise children;
but to be an ideal family realizing the highest possibilities
the following requirements would seem necessary:

1. Parents of about equal grade of development, culture,

234

refinement, race, religion and ideas of equal humanitarian*
tendencies.

2. Both parents must be equally rational practical beings,
each capable of earning the means to support a family if
necessary.

3. The purpose of the family in the minds of the parentsi
must be ultimately that of producing and raising children
until they are able to shift for themselves, or of mutually
helping each other in daily life's details.

4. The family idea should not be carried out with ex-
tinction of the individual independence; father, mother and
children should retain the greatest degree possible of origi-
nality, independence, individuality, privacy.

5. Where there are no children, divorce should be as
easy as marriage.

6. In separation of the parents the children should be
taken by third persons, to be educated, unless either parent
be proved particularly fitted to raise them. In most cases
boys are raised better by the father and girls by the mother.

7. All separations absolute.

8. As the wife, so to speak, deteriorates more than the
husband during married life, a reasonable compensation
should be granted by husband to the wife to serve her, if sep-
arated, to support herself in part.

• 9. In all divorces without children the cause of the di-
vorce is no more a matter of public record than was the cause
of marriage; it is a private affair between two people; is even
immaterial; as the refusal of either side made marriage im-
possible, thus the refusal of either side to live with the other
should dissolve marriage, divorce therefore be merely a
matter of record in the proper courts, as was marriage.

The Pantheos of Family is one of the most important to
which Pantheists should give their energy in its improve-

•"Humane" and "human" have different meanings: humane in
modern life means, as we would like to see us treated ourselves;
human refers to the race as opposed to animals. "Humanitarian"
means in accordance with the brotherhood of all mankind, an ideal
of sentiment. Although the adjective "humanitarian" "has been pre-
empted by a small ancient Christian sect, now extinct in its specific
organization, we think this sect has lost the right to that word by
non-use, and we use it here in the meaning of the adjective belong-
ing to the noun "humanity"— brotherhood of mankind. In this sense
it is distinct from "human"— an adjective belonging to the body-
while "humanitarian" belongs to the soul, and also from "humane,**
which refers to an ideal including even animals.

835

ment; from high ideal families will issue men and women
of high, harmonious development in all the numerous phases
of Pantheos which constitute the highest, most progressive
forms of life in nations, races and even our Terrestrial and
Cosmic Pantheos. We will elaborate only a few points of
what seems to us requirements of a harmonious family. We
would appear not to give our readers full value, if we had put
into this little book none but intellectual, even abstruse, dry,
distantly useful conclusions and not attempted to treat prac-
tical subjects within the comprehension of everybody from
the Pantheistic standpoint, a standpoint free from control of
any ancestor government in the shape of gods, customs, no-
tions, laws, usages, etc., but controlled exclusively by reasons
of future possibilities of a development which, for the first
time, allows to the body rights and potentialities equal with
those of the soul.

As to the first requirement it is notorious that the cultured
man who marries his pretty servant girl rarely finds in the
family thus formed his ideal realized, also the refined woman
who marries her butler may, by dint of great sacrifice of self,
establish outwardly a harmonious union, but we do not see
her aching, yearning mind. Equal refinement is indispen-
sible, the man accustomed to tidy habits and becoming dress
in his lady friends will receive a shock in his illusion from
which frequently he does not recover, if he sees his bride
roll up her hair into bunches, with papers sticking out, to
make it curl. And he admired those curls so much! Now
in his presence she wears the slovenly insulting paper wads
while his friends are allowed to only see the curls; these
curls assume in his fancy the shape of fishhooks with which
gudgeons are caught. On the other hand, if a woman who
brushes her teeth five times a day has to kiss a husband
whose lips show a rim of licorice from chewing tobacco,
whose breath is an evaporated bill of fare of beer, leek, to-
bacco and food decaying between unpicked teeth, she ex-
periences more mild martyrdom than bliss.

For husband and wife to be of the same race is not as vital
as other points, but numerous bickerings are avoided if they
are copatriots, frequently deep seated differences in the in-
nervation of sexual organs exist even between as nearly re-
lated races as French and English which rapidly estrange

236

husband and wife. For a European to marry a Chinese
appears frequently hardly less congenial than the production
of mules. Even marriages between full blood negroes and
whites are not sensible; the children always suffer from the
combination; they do not feel in harmony with the race of
either parent, and are extremely likely not to grow to suc-
cessful men and women; as a rule they are not handsomer or
brighter than the superior parent. Besides, the races Negro
and Caucasian are now already over 30,000 years apart or
over 1,000 generations and are likely to possess differences
of the sexual organs, of body and intellect entirely irrecon-
cilable. No man or woman can afford to neglect differences
in higher phases of Pantheos to gratify lower ones.

Both parents should be of the same religion. While they
themselves may harmonize, because equally dull, indiffer-
ent in their respective religions, or equally refined, tabooing
the subject, the children are invariably the sufferers. Even,
if the best arrangement is made, namely, the boys of the
father^s, the girls of the mother^s religion, brothers and sis-
ters soon become strangers, a crevasse deeper than family
opens between them. Deep indeed must be the love of a
Protestant to a Catholic maid if he marries her, for, to use
a common expression, he marries not only his wife, but also
her Catholic relatives and the entire Catholic hierarchy. The
Catholic priest, through the confessional, pries into his in-
nermost secrets, lords over his family. If the wife dies like a
true Catholic she cannot help dying with the conviction that
her husband, merely because he is a Protestant, will be in
hell forever hereafter, separated from her by hatred and en-
vying and cursing her.

While the sectarian spirit between the different Protest-
ant sects is, as a rule, not very savage or bitter nowadays,
many a family enjoys no peace, simply because the mother
is a Baptist and the father a Methodist. A true philosopher
coined the saying: If you want to marry well agree with
your wife's mother in religion, with her father in politics.

As to the second group of requirements we will treat it in
combination with others; the third is almost a matter of
course. Long continued sexual intercourse without children
differs in nothing but an empty formality from prostitution;
if either parent is innately sterile, and sex not the chief

237

aim, the mutual help becomes the vital element and pur-
pose. The duty of the parents, especially of the mother, in
our present civilization would seem to be reasonably satis-
fied if she had brought three children into the world, or had
at least undergone three honest endeavors of nature to
launch three living children into humanity. A nation must
increase by the excess of births over deaths, otherwise other
races, more fertile, more ready to maternal martyrdom, will
outstrip it. Statistics prove that it requires at least three
childbirths per average married female to supply the removal
by death, the deficiency due to natural sterility, abortions,
child murder and normal children mortality.

A race with only two children per family is actually los-
ing ground; all the nations increasing rapidly have as an
arithmetical average from 2.8 to 3.5 children per family.
But a loving wife will wish to see her husband and herself
rejuvenated and perpetuated in as many children as can be
properly raised and supported; hence in this as in most
things human a reasonable medium result should be at-
tained. It is the duty of the wealthy to have many chil-
dren; that of the poor to have few; the parents have not done
their duty if they have only produced children who cursed
the day they were bom; who, brought up in the bitterness
of envy and hatred, find only solace in a stupid torpor of
existence. Every one who, as a child, belonged to a har-
monious family of many children, realizes the enormous
amount of happiness derived from the intercourse of so many
kindred minds within a harmonious unit. A single child is
almost always a spoiled child; one child of only two children,
if both be, e. g., boys, is too much brother— centered" —
but if children belong to a family of 5, 6, or 8, they are edu-
cating themselves for the best fitness for more extensive
human intercourse; many selfish, weak traits are rubbed off,
polished by the daily contact with a number of similar rough
points in brothers and sisters. If you put one piece of rock
into a stream, it is likely to become imbedded in sand or
mud, but if there are several, their motion works out the
sand between them, they wear off the projecting comers and
rough spots and each one, no matter what shape original,
will acquire a smooth surface. The mass of humanity can-
not be built out of rough rocks, it must be rounded, hewn

238

material^ and no agent acting up character can accomplish
that better than brothers and sisters. Besides, the mutual
aid from many brothers and sisters in mature life is so great
that such a family is more likely to become rich, influential,
powerful than the single son of ever so rich parents. My
brother's friends are to a certain extent my friends; if I
have only four friends, my five brothers only four each, my
three sisters only six each, I may reckon, in case of necessity,
upon the aid of 43 more or less good friends; I am more
likely not to go under in the struggle for existence than the
person with only 4 or even 41 friends. Hence, what has
survived have been families of large children; through two
or even five or six generations families of 2 children may
survive, but after about 10 or 20 generations not a trace of
them will be found. But, aside of children, the raising of
which is certainly a vital duty to young, healthy normal
people, the mutual help derived from married life is also of
the greatest importance. It is a wrong state of society if the
widower grows old in his lonely house and the widow in her
declining years cannot enjoy the company of a domestic
friend called husband. After the children are raised, the
purpose of the family for mutual improvement and help re-
mains as strong as ever; husband and wife have enjoyed their
youth together, they have borne the trials and worries of a
household full of youngsters, they are entitled to mutual
regard. This purpose of family is frequently fully as high
and exalted as that of raising children. It is just for this
purpose that a proper mating is all important. No normal
man can do his best unless somebody helps him, procures
him good nourishment, comfort and a refuge, so to speak,
where he can find repose from the struggles of existence. A
woman is not inferior to her husband for paying attention
to his stomach, clothes, comfort, peace of mind and health,
nay, she only becomes his equal when he enters the battle of
life fed by the food which she prepared, dressed in the
clothes kept in order by her careful hand. If she did not
do it her husband would have to give much more time, en-
ergy, effort (all in the shape of money) to have a stranger do
it, and he could not be as successful.

The wife miist have a special useful training, not only a
general smattering of dress terms, a frivolity of laziness and

23g

idleness. It is much more difficult to cook a good meal than
to read Greek; a good cook requires from two to four years
to learn her trade; any girl can learn Greek in one year.
Cooking is culinary chemistry; the housewife who does her
own cooking is the chemist of the kitchen, her art is as su-
perior to the one who dabbles in painting or Latin or gen-
eral gossip as the art of the chemist is superior to that of
a house painter, or a Latin grammarian, a stamp collector
or a newspaper writer. The author has studied chemistry
and Latin; after 20 years of chemistry he just reached the
stage where he began to realize the enormity of the science;
after 3 years' study of Latin there was no author he could
not read at sight; hence in chemistry in 20 years not 1 per
cent of the knowable was assimilated; in Latin in 3 years
over 90 per cent. Let those foolish virgins who study clas-
sics but not cookery consider that they have worked on a
much simpler, "cheaper,*' even superficial, shallow form of
education than their despised "Bridget" who had to study
the complex science of cooking combined with the difficult
art of suiting the taste. A woman should be a practical help-
mate, not merely a dreamy, sentimental, vague, useless, gen-
eral "sympathy" and "love" fountain. Let her show her
love, not talk only love, by doing a necessary though perhaps
distasteful duty; that of feeding her husband. In a small
household a hired cook has no place. Cookery is the most
specific duty of the wife and the most vital one. While the
cynic saying: "The way to a man's heart is through the
stomach" is not quite true, the obverse: "A man's heart
will not walk away from his wife in the kitchen," is cer-
tainly much nearer the truth. On the other hand, with all
the modern facilities, a great many drudgeries now practiced
are not necessary. Unless for purposes of economy, the
washing should not be done by the wife; also bakeries fur-
nish daily and cheaply an excellent bread; that daily round
should be taken from her; modem improvements in the kit-
chen have made it possible for a wife to do with her little
finger what it required formerly both arms to do; the good
excuses for a wife for not doing the most important of house-
work, namely, cooking, are becoming fewer and fewer.
Many men make foolish demands, expect for too little money
too much food or too choice food; but, after all, a man can-

240

not spend as much money for food with a hired cook as he
could, if hi^ loving sensible wife would do that duty; the
German Empress to-day thinks it a pleasurable act to pre-
pare a dish for her husband.

To a certain extent there must exist a business arrange-
ment between husband and wife. If the wife contributes to
the success of the business she is entitled to some share.
Very many men neglect those business arrangements en-
tirely. The wife, aside of her support, is entitled to a rea-
sonable monthly share of the business, of the husband's in-
come and, may be when he has or is about to fail, she as a
friend can lend him from her savings enough to keep up his
head. We men may even, in entire justice, start by saying
all our earnings are primarily ours; but, as we pay for the
man who sweeps our offices, the cashier who keeps track of
our commercial tools, exactly by the same law do we owe
our wives a reasonable compensation for being the providers
for our systems, our constant preserving doctors. Quite
aside from the fact of her being a friend and wife, she also
works for us. A common clerk in our store we pay say $12
a week; our wife is entitled to as much. We do not pay her
for her friendship, her love, the work for the- children, for
those we return in kind; friendship cannot be bought with
store money; love paid for becomes prostitution; but for the
mechanical and domestic routine work of our wife for us,
she is entitled to full fair compensation; of course, her
board, shelter, clothing for which we pay may in fairness be
deducted and if she is extravagant, it serves her right if she
uses up her salary in tinsel and frivolities and has no money
left.

On the other side, if a wife is lazy or "namby-pamby" or
frivolous, hires servants to do work which she ought to do
(cooking), it is fair that the wages of such a servant should
come out of her allowance. In some manner the wife must
earn her living, board and necessary clothing from her hus-
band, she cannot sell her friendship, love and sex for them,
without degrading herself to the business of a legalized
prostitute. The fact of her having children gives her no
new compensation claim; if she is paid for having children
she becomes a breeding mare kept in a stud for such pur-
poses. In a fair well regulated household the wife earns her

241

living by the same honorable means as any other employee
or partner of her husband. That is why the requirement of
equal business abilities (each in his or her line) is an im-
portant element. For true sentiment we can only return
sentiment; if a "sentiment" is satisfied with returns for cash
we have mistaken hunger for wisdom, thirst for desire of cul-
ture, and sexual heat for love. The husband will feel tied
much more intimately to a wife who, in the direction of la-
bor, returns to him a dollar's worth of her labor for a dol-
lar's worth of his labor; whose friendship and love he can-
not buy for money, but has to return in kind, who raises th^
children because they are "our" children. Of course, the
wife is again entitled to compensation for the extra mechan-
ical work of tending to the children. Viewed from a busi-
ness standpoint the wife is, as a rule, entitled to more than
she gets, but from the standpoint of true sentiment to rather
less than is at present customary. Presents are degrading,
pauperizing, true friends do not pay each other's drinks,
cigars, meals, etc.; it is the very characteristic of true friend-
ship to not "sponge" on the other; but, true friends are
ready to help each other in need; the same condition should
prevail in a household: We must never overlook that a
wife is many things to us combined in one person. She is
Our best friend — can only be returned by making us her

best friend.
Our sexual complement — entirely reciprocal and mu-
tual, fully settled in the acts.
The human engine of bearing our children — she is en-
titled to sympathy, but her greater share of pain,
labor and misery and corresponding reward lie deep
in the Pantheos of Destiny; he will compensate.
Our housekeeper — entitled to material compensation.
Our cook — entitled to the compensation of a good clerk.
Our governess— entitled to compensation.
Our inspiration — a rare wife who is, so to speak, the in-
tellectual complement of her husband, furnishing the
cheer where he is pusillanimous, furnishing ideas,
suggestions in business that did not occur to him;
she is then his full partner, his inventor, his patent
attorney and worth to be at least half-partner.
Unfortunately in real life too many women think, if the

242

sex has been allowed to takes its course, that they have been
the Alpha and Omega of their husbands; as a consequence
we get "scandals," cheerless homes, homes in misery and
debt, homes without comfort, poverty stricken homes. Es-
pecially the last demand, that of an inspiration, should be
the aim of all wives; but, inspiration, practiced on a dyspep-
tic, "Bridget"-fed husband, is apt to die like a seed that fell
into the mucus of an atonic stomach.

Inspiration does not mean that a woman should drive her
husband to poetry, it means that she should be able, by
giving practical business suggestions, discussing competently
the pros and cons, to help her husband to take the best
course in the many hundreds of daily life's details. The
wife of the saloonkeeper who shows him good reasons why
he should buy his supply from another brewery furnishes
just as much the principle of inspiration as the wife of an
architect who makes a sketch for her husband. But to give
inspiration she must be her hsband's best friend, otherwise
he will keep important matters from her knowledge.

For an ideal family the ease of getting divorced is all im-
portant. If the wife knows that she can keep her husband
only by being to him the best wife he could get, she will make
all efforts to hold him and the husband will do the same.
Modern ideas have abolished slavery within the sphere of hu-
manity, also within the sphere of religion; the next fortress
of slavery to fall will be the wretched homes and families of
uncongenial mates; the slavery of the individual to his body
and soul will be the last. Slavery is the idea of forcible
control of our bodies or minds without proper compensation.
It is a principle of gross injustice, a phase of Pantheos of
the Past. Its abolition began at the highest phase. Human-
ity first. Slavery for life was well practiced in Judaism,
even in old Greece and Eome, France, Germany and Eng-
land, in Eussia almost up to 1860 (although very mild), in
the United States up to 1861, in Spanish South America to
1880, and still exists in Africa, China (to a slight extent),
even practically, though not legally, in many mines, factor-
ies and enterprises over the entire world. But slavery proper
in northern Europe (exclusive of Russia) was dead about
1000 A. D. Much slower progressed the freeing of religious
slaves. Only in Japan exists a relatively high religious lib-

243

erty, in England a little less than in the United States, more
in France than in the United States, less in Germany than
in the United States, more in Turkey than in Spain, much
more in India than in the United States, etc. What are the
signs of religious slavery? They are: Laws compelling the
bringing up of children in a certain religion (in force in
Russia, Austria, Spain, partly in Germany), laws compel-
ling the presence of a priest at weddings (in force in almost
all countries except Germany, France and some states of
the United States), laws compelling the observance of Sun-
day or religious holidays (rank in England, United States,
worst in the English colonies, less so in Russia, less in Aus-
tria, most liberal in Germany, France, Japan), laws com-
pelling burial with priestly assistance (Russia, Austria, etc.).
The fight against this religious slavery is still going on.
Why is it slavery, e. g., to have Sunday laws? Because they
compel the non-believer in Jehovahism to celebrate, observe
or acknowledge what he considers a fraud without any com-
pensation to him. It would be just as much religious slavery
if, e. g., the "infidels" made it a law to spit once a month on
the Bible.

Nationalism also has its slaves. The man who serves as a
soldier 7 years in Russia, 5 years in France, 2 years in Ger-
many, 5 years in the United States (the latter voluntary)
is for the time being a slave of nationalism. The attack on
the system of standing armies, is a movement to abolish one
phase of slavery.

A voluntary submission to service can never be called slav-
ery, unless it should be more difficult to quit the service than
to enter. This is the reason why marriage without equal
facility of divorce as of marriage is a state of slavery.

But divorces will be fewer the more chances are given the
sexes to become well acquainted with each other before mar-
riage. The foolish shutting up, fencing in, hedging of
girls and women, formerly done by moats, towers and chas-
tity belts, now by "customs," "introduction," "sets" and
cliques is a slavery of women for the abolishment of which
they should fight. Women and men should be given far more
liberty of becoming acquainted, a far more free competition
should be allowed, many foolish frills of ceremonies — almost
always ancient petrified lies, forms of ancestor worship —

244

should be abolished; a girl should be at liberty to make ac-
quaintances as readily as men do; no danger in that if she is
brought up properly. Serves her right if she gets hurt or
mistakes a tailor's dummy for a man and has to use easy
divorce to try better the next time. Nothing educates either
sex as much as free non-sexual intercourse with the other
sex. Of course any true woman or true man will protest if
sexual liberties are even hinted at without propei: safeguard
(marriage) as to consequences. Our acquaintances before
marriage we cultivate chiefly for the friendship absolutely
necessary for a properly matched wedded couple. In the
purely sexual relations all men and all women are monoto-
nously alike, there is very little difference or quality between
them, although proper refinement and education produces
considerable differences in later life. Many a bright clever
girl feels the human fence of tailor dummies about her, but
custom does not allow her to break through, and many a
man longs for the healthy ruddiness of a country girl, be-
cause in all the maze, frou f rou, and billows of walking dry
goods he cannot find a true woman; of course, his "country
girl" might turn out to be of that virtue which is sheer ig-
norance and of a kind that would, if she had a chance, see no
loftier aim than buying a department store full of gaudy rags
and gewgaws, leaving to her husband only a little comer at
the paying counter.

Greater freedom of intercourse leads to greater knowledge.
In all married men and women the ardor and fire of sex soon
pales, what remains is the true friendship coupled inci-
dentally with sexual relations. Friendship is the most im-
portant element in marriage for the parents and cannot be
"caught" like love; it is a tender plant needing constant
care; true friendship rebels against any compulsion. "Just
see how nicely Fido and Tabby eat from the same dish, why
cannot we get along as well?" said the lady to her discon-
tented lord. "Just tie them together and you will see true
friendship with a vengeance," said he, a genuine philosopher.

S45

XXIII.
LIBEBTY.

Liberty as such belongs to a group of phases of Pantheos
strangely distinctive. It is the tendency of every unit to
retain its individuality, even while serving a larger unit; thus
it may be said it was the liberty principle which, retaining
the individuality of every mica, homblendCj^ feldspar par-
ticle, built up the granite. This individuality is an element
of consciousness; hence liberty belongs to the high Pantheos
of conscious existence to which belongs also the "spirit" of
individualism. We can see here dimly unfolding an entire
group of phases of Pantheos. In Physics tangential force
represents the liberty-principle, while attraction represents
the enslavement; only their harmonious co-operation pro-
duces as a resultant our universe, the planetary system.

Liberty as a principle comes to us dimly from the infi-
nitely small, becomes clearer and clearer around man, dis-
appears finally beyond our limited vision. The nature of
liberty is, of course, at present unthinkable; it lies enfolded
in the Pantheos of Destiny and will find its apotheosis in
Harmonious Perfection, for we cannot even conceive any
Harmony without complete Liberty blended to Perfection
with its antipole, namely, attraction, even "slavery" in part.

The principle of Liberty appears frequently much higher
than the tangible objects. Its outward appearance within
the Pantheos of Quantity, our foundation phase — see chap-
ter 8 — as applied to atoms, molecules, etc., is as yet un-
known. A trace appears already as producing as results
the individual crystals, grains, etc.; when the first two
amoeba appeared on our earth ever so little different from
each other, liberty had already found an entrance into hu-
manity and produced the individual. In animals the pres-
sure of liberty is frequently as strong as in man; the caged
eagle looks up to the sky, stretches and spreads his wings,
beats the air, all due to a call from liberty. Liberty is

246

strongest around the phases of the nation, religion, morals;
becomes dimmer at humanity and animals and vanishes for
us already within the Pantheos of Earth. The difference be-
tween Earth and Pantheos of Earth may be said, incident-
ally, to be this: When we speak of Earth we mean a certain
ball of given dimensions, movements, location, etc.; when
we use the term Pantheos of our Earth, we speak of our
Earth as being composed of many groups of kindred phe-
nomena, allied and attached to many larger groups of phe-
nomena, all of them working towards a certain future, name-
ly, that of being conscious constituents of approachable
enormous units; hence the Pantheos of our Earth is not a
goblin sitting somewhere in its caves, but it is the entire
Earth having become conscious, in its specific manner, of
existence within still larger conscious units. Thus, every
one of the trillions of molecules in my body shares
with me in its specific manner, my conscious exist-
ence contributes to it its share, receives its specific re-
ward, punishment, pleasure and pain; hence I, as a phase
of Pantheos, call it even the Pantheos of C. A., represent
millions of phases of smaller units, while I, as simple C. A.
stand alone, am a subject of the Bertillon system, etc. As
I succeed in attaching myself to the Family *^idea,^' National
*^idea,^^ Human "idea,^* Pantheic "idea/^ to that extent will
I take along all the molecules and millions of phases within
me, and we become part of the Phases of the Pantheos of
Family, of Nation, of the I'niverse. At present, seeing the
stars and receiving their light consciously into my eyes is my
only conscious attachment to the Pantheos of our Cosmos.
With higher intellect I might feel their attraction, their
spectra, their planets, etc., might develop special senses
suited for them, just as our eye is a special apparatus to con-
nect us consciously with men and women, suns and crystals.
But to return to Liberty. Liberty we found to be cen-
trifugal, or better, tangential force; when the tangential force
becomes excessive it leads to a breaking of the combination,
it becomes apparent repulsion; hence Liberty is not de-
structive, merely its excess. A curious linking together ap-
pears here between Liberty and Love. Love may be said to
be chemical affinity introduced into human affairs; in thiB
affinity the molecules rush together, a centripetal force ap-

247

pears, or Love, Liberty, Slavery, Union are shown to be-
long to kindred phases. We have no one-force-repulsion in
gravitation, but we have it in electricity; hence Love and
Hatred belong to the electricity group, Liberty and Slavery
to the gravitation group of forces.

From this view we can already discern the specific form of
liberty as applied to the Pantheos of our Earth; it is its
flight through space; this, combining with the tendency to
enslave, absorb it, exerted by our Sun, by its attraction, re-
sults in our travel around the Sun, our seasons, years and
cycles. Love within the Pantheos of our Earth does not
show clearly as yet; we do not know whether any electricity
comes from the Sun; but the aurora borealis is a tellurial love
feast somewhere in its specific atmospheric form.

At present within man. Pantheism which recognizes Lib-
erty as one of the most powerful, most desirable, most ad-
vanced agents of progress in this and future existences finds
the following specific aims to fight for, using again the scale
of the PantKeos of quantity in chapter 8. We only men-
tion a few:

Within man: Personal liberty as emphasized in these
forms of extreme use: Liberty of body, freedom to
choose any name, no parent-fixed family and fore-
name, freedom of suicide, freedom of pleasures, lib-
erty of gambling, freedom of dress, of personal habits,
freedom of disposal of property, freedom to keep on
or take off the hat solely dependent on owner^s desires,
etc. We put some forms purposely in a somewhat
harsh, offensive form to emphasize a present lack in
these directions in the United States.
Within society: Man equal rights for polite treatment
with women, e. g., to keep his hat on his head where
women are allowed to do so; neither to be compelled
either way; man to have the right to wear a veil in
court, if woman has and if he chooses to do so; no
separate rooms, cars, seats for the sexes, but fair priv-
acy for both; no rules: No smoking, no ......

no ; leave this to the developing sense of

politeness of man towards man, or woman towards
woman, or man towards woman; removal of social
stigma from women who share their husbands pleas-

248

ures; freedom of either sex to dress in either^s garb,
where no fraud is thereby intended; freedom of
making acquaintances of either sex.

Within the family: Equal freedom of marriage and di-
vorce; freedom of children from vicious treatment and
of parents from unnecessary outside meddling.
Every adult citizen a special officer towards children.
No legal sales to minors. No compulsory vaccina-
tion of adults, but of children; no harm done by it,
but much good; no merging of property; no dowery
rights, but fixed rights of children and damage rights
to wife; no suits for breach of promise to marry be-
yond the actual expenditures and losses; no suit for
"^alienation of affection/^ because true affection can-
not have a market value and, if it was not a true one,
it was anyway worthless; in no form of court pro-
ceedings the wife, her sex and love to be treated as a
marketable commodity with cash value; freedom of
families from the practice of early religious compul-
sion towards children — no laws to this effect, but the
legal acknowledgment of the right of a child to not
have to submit to compulsory religion, etc.

Within the nation: Majority rules; no plurality rule; no two-
thirds, three-quarters, three-fifths rule, which means
minority rule (one-third, one-quarter, two-fifths); no
ancestor laws; all statutes to lapse in, say, ten years;
all constitutions in forty years (a political generation)
unless specifically renewed; all law courts free to all;
no arrest on individual complaint, only on complaint
from proper authorities; all judges elected or appoint-
ed for a limited term; all elective officials not to be
re-elected to the same position, to give the more voters
a chance; right to choose monarchical or republican
form of government; a judicial discipline court, before
which all officials and especially judges, police offi-
cials, aldermen, representatives, may be brought for
despotism, brutality, venality, incapacity; all candi-
dates for office must undergo a civil service examina-
tion before an election to receive a mark which ap-
pears on the official ballot; for single heads, majority
vote, e. i., if the first election split the vote among

249

three or four candidates, a second election to be held
between the two highest — this to destroy ring slavery
within a party; single heads removable by discipline —
court, and new election to be ordered, at which they
are not candidates; terms of mayors, governors, etc.,
two to five years; no special tax laws for certain
trades, exempting others; only those vote who pay di-
rect taxes; a poll tax is not unjust; liberty, even in
jails, to the extent that either men and women have
their heads shaved, or neither; no despoty, even in
prison; emasculation of the thoroughly vicious; scien-
tific experiments on criminals, etc.
Within humanity: Open ports for all; no "free trade" or
"protection," but an economic tariff; equal rights
everywhere to Caucasian, Negro, Chinese, Japanese,
Malay, Tagalo, Hawaiian, Bedskin, Hindoo; no gov-
ernment without the consent of the governed; hence,
no annexation without consent of the majority of the
inhabitants; no filibustering wars for expansion.
Within religion and morals (Ideals of the soul), (Ideals of
the body): No religious laws; no exemption of prop-
erty on pretext or plea of religious, educational or
benevolent purposes; if we exempt them we abridge
the equal rights and therefore the liberty of others;
all religions and gods allowed free competition for
the possession of an individual; no religious Sunday
laws; no holidays connected with religious feasts or
fables (Good Friday, Ascension Day of Buddah, etc.);
Christianity no preference given in oaths, ceremonies;
no prayer before public bodies, except sectarian ones.
It is not necessary to enter much into detail; in some form
or other most of these principles have been fought for before,
are even in force in many lands, are party platforms and
objects of special associations.

We will merely pick out one very small, but exceedingly
offensive form of petty tyranny — a small tyrant is always the
worst tyrant — namely, that of us men being compelled to
take off hats in churches, courts, even reading rooms of public
libraries, nay, even some dining rooms and stores, while
women are allowed to keep theirs on. Is there any sense in
this? The Jews know best the likes and dislikes of Jehovah

250

since 3,000 years ago, and they keep their hats on in their
synagogues, nay, even compel strangers to cover their heads.
Hence, Jehovah cannot object to it; he would have, through
the priests, made a law if he did. Then, if Jehovah is not
offended by the women keeping on their hats in Christian
churches, — and he has it in for them especially, from Gen.
iii, 16 to St. Paul, — ^why should he object to men remain-
ing covered? Even Jesus nowhere mentioned the hat re-
moval; in a Christian church all we would seem to have in
view would be Jehovah worship; the Jews prove that hats are
immaterial to him, hence why should men be finical? they
are not the onies to be worshipped. All taking off of hats is
a sign of slavery and serfdom. Take judges in courts; they
are the servants of the people, namely of the lawyers, wit-
nesses, plaintiffs, defendants, and curious mob, who elected
them, made them. When has it been custom for a master to
take the hat off before his servant? In public reading rooms,
why should the voters and tax payers, in their own building,
before their own servants, take off hats? It is a silly, ancient
obeisance.

Liberty, as a phase of Pantheos, seems to be valued much
higher by man than even the object of that phase in a given
case. Thus, the cases of persons w ho would not mind volun-
tarily to give away thousands of dollars, but fight to death in
the defense of a few pennies which somebody tries to take by
force, are exceedingly numerous. As liberty passes the
range of the individual, it seems to be gaining up to
Humanity, but about that phase its height is reached.
Many a man, who fought in the slavery- war of 1861
to 1865, said: "I do not care to fight to free niggers,
but I fight for the Union.^^ The chance of he, him-
self, being in danger of becoming a slave seemed so im-
probably remote that the principle became, so to speak, thin,
etherial; but the danger of being a citizen of a weak nation
was greater. As to coherence among races in the fight for lib-
erty against races, the principle is more etherial than in
nation against nation, but still a little stronger. When the
Arabs, in 700, invaded France all European nations, who
could do so, sent help to drive them back. The crusaders
(although of a more religious aspect) saw races united against
races. Very strong is liberty within the two phases of Be-

251

ligion and Morals; in fact, its greatest strength lies there;
there must be, within those two phases, the greatest tendency
to subjugation, otherwise liberty would not be so strong.
Bigotry and slavery are the reverse of liberty; they vitalize
the desire to enslave others into observance of our religion, our
code of ethics, morals, and even our habits of living. Bigotry
tries to level individualism, while freedom brings it out. Big-
otry produced the monotonous sand dunes of the Sahara,
the almost endless succession of morasses, steppes and deserts
of Siberia, even the uninteresting prairies of the United
States, while freedom raised the Alps, the Bocky Mquntains,
the cliffs and canons, the land and ocean. Bigotry would
make the entire earth one flat ball populated by one flat race,
speaking one flat language, praying to one shallow god in
monotonous unison; liberty would make every town and
house on earth worth seeing by itself, would make every man,
in a different voice, worship a different god in an interesting,
diversified manner. Bigotry produces monotony; liberty calls
out diversity and differences. By means of this contrast we
can dimly see what Liberty within the Pantheos of the
earth is; it is a diversity of its surface and motion, its small,
slow, oscillatory changes. If the bigot had power he would
make the earth go around the sun in exactly one hundred or
four hundred days including the stops on "Sabbath,^^ would
stop the poles from "wabbling,^^ would so regulate the heav-
ens that all would go by some shallow schedule; but we can-
not quite say how that would affect the solar system, hence
cannot define the form which liberty assumes within the solar
or cosmic system. Harmonious perfection, according to the
bigot, does not exist at all; he has no use and hates the very
word; hence, we may say that, if it was not for liberty, we
could not conceive of true harmony. Is Harmony nothing
else but the highest form of liberty? We cannot answer, be-
cause the Pantheos of Harmonious Perfection, in the sense
used here, is a Pantheos including earth, sun and stars as
a unit belonging together, and as we cannot discern the
element of liberty clearly within the solar system and cosmic
system, we cannot clearly surmise what resultant they pro-
duce within Harmonious Perfection, or, last, Pantheos of all!
.Liberty as a condition is opposed to slavery; he who en-
slaves us politically is a tyrant, or, if he desires and tries to

252

enslave us in matters of intellect or morals a bigot. Those
names are here not used in the sense of opprobrious appel-
lates^ but merely as linguistic distinctions. Laws are human
rules for the regulation of human affairs and as such par-
take of many phases of Pantheos: Law is a code of morals;
is a code of humanitarianism; is a code of nationalities, of
governments, of races, even of the earth and sun (light);
but again Harmonious Perfection is beyond the pale of law;
a law fixing, e. g., the maximum of land that could be held
by one individual might be in the direction of Harmony, but
because compulsory not perfect. "Liberte, Egalite, Frater-
nite,^' the great motto on the banners of the French revolu-
tion, meant: Liberte=Liberty of the individual and fam-
ily; Egalite=Liberty within the nation; Fratemite=Liberty
within all humanity. As at present the arm of his own gov-
ernment is the most powerful tyrant or bigot of every in-
dividual, our most determined efforts have to be directed
towards the weakening of its tyrannical features. As all gov-
ernments are constituted, it always means one group of peo-
ple domineering and ruling another group within the same
nation. If laws are made with the sole and single
purpose of their producing the best government, none of
us object. "The best government is that which governs
least," is a still true principle pronounced by that great
genius J. J. Kousseau. Comparisons are odious, but it
may be said that per square mile and per one thous-
and people more laws are on the statute books and
in force in the United States than in any other country
in the world; laws made this year, last year, a decade ago,
nay, even laws are in force made by ancestors four genera-
tions ago, now all long dead and rotten. We are more an-
cestor-governed than any other nation except the Chinese.
Is that liberty? Liberty of government must be government
by. the living not by the dead. It is slavery of law by an-
cestors if it is made one iota more difficult to abolish or
amend laws than it was to pass them. Hence, if a law was
passed by a plain majority, but can only be amended or abro-
gated by a two-thirds majority, it establishes a slavery; a
rule of a minority (one-third) over a majority (two-thirds).
For a few years the people of the United States need legis-
latures whose sole duty it should be to abolish ancestor-

253

made laws, superfluous, bigoted and petty laws for private
gain, and all two-thirds, three-fifths, three-fourths majority
rules.

We need laws and strong laws. There are always living
brutish men and women in every community who exceed
their rightful sphere; who want to receive without giving
equivalents; who interfere with other people's rights; who
want to occupy places of trust without being fit for them.
Some of these can only be restrained in body because they
have nothing else to give. This general principle will fit
all cases: Whoever takes or receives from another any of
his belongings or rights without giving a reasonable equiva-
lent, commits an unlawful act.

Abolishment of all slavery is one of the chief aims of all
Pantheists; within many phases of Pantheos slavery has dis-
appeared, or is mollified; only within one it still holds on
tenaciously, within the Pantheists of the family. Considera-
tions of the nation should have made divorce almost compul-
sory where the union produces no children; instead of that
bigotry, envy and savage cruelty have prevailed in our laws in
making marriage very easy, but divorce extremely difficult.
Marriage, instead of being made a bower of happiness becomes
a rat trap for either sex. Of course, divorce must be in
thorough justice (not law I). So many people confound law
and justice; law is to justice what the boyish sketch of:
"This is a cat,'^ "This is a dog," is to the real animal. The
simple, desire of either childless party for divorce should be
sufficient to obtain it, just as consent of both was neces-
sary for marriage. The matter of ^Tblame^' is mostly a form
of legal gossip and may be left to old women and men. Lib-
erty of divorce is entirely different from "free love,'' the first
is a regulated rational method of freeing sterile or badly
mated couples, the second the abolishment of the family idea
and return to simian life in the forests. The children are
wards of the individual, the family and the state, and they
must be kept in view constantly. Divorce must provide for
the children first, the wife next, the husband last. As means
of rendering divorce simple, an ante-marriage contract
should be insisted on, the property of husband and wife
should be kept strictly separate, each one left free to freely
and independently dispose of it, no transfers between hus-

254

band and wife except for commercial equivalents; transfers
for love or friendship are equivalents for prostitution or
encouragements of parasitism. Each divorced parent must
contribute to the support of the children, but not of each
other, excei)t that the wife, owing to greater deterioration, is
entitled, in justice, in all divorces, no matter what the cause,
to some material compensation to make up for her loss of
chances to find another husband; the wealth added to her
will make up for the waning bodily attractiveness. This de-
preciation is alike for pauper and millionaire, might be, e.
g., $20 for maidenhood and $100 for every year of married
life, $100 for every childbirth. This, the husband would be
bound to pay to his divorced wife, but otherwise divorce
should be as easy as marrriage, without lawyer and courts,
except courts of record.

XXIV.

PEEVENTION" OR CURE?

Innumerable phases of Pantheos strive for consciousness
in man,, all of them strive for existence. If we aim at becom-
ing identified with more and more complex phases of Pan-
theos, because we realize that they are the unavoidable step-
ping stones to our final aim, — to become conscious elements
of All-Pantheos — we have to try to accept all connections
with all Phases, but not to allow them to domineer us. The
Pantheos of the earth even cannot be reached until we have
connected ourselves with all its component phases; without
it we cannot enter the Pantheos of our Cosmos, even not
Harmonious Perfection. Our bodies we must take along
through futurity; these bodies are the chief means of real-
izing, assimilating, consciofying the innumerable phases now
subject to Pantheos of Gravitation; our bodies are abso-
lute slaves to it as yet; only when we have learnt to remove
weight will we be free from this form of slavery. Our souls
are already much more free; while the means for producing
thought are under the dominion of gravitation, thought itself
does not appear to be subject to it, just like a candle weigh-
ing ounces producing the weightless light. If Christ or

255

Buddha had been gods materially superior to us, and had
really ascended, as described, they would have told us the
secret of freedom from gravitation. That such a thing is
possible is shown by the existence of electric attraction, and
repulsion, and equilibrium; a ])ith ball, properly electrified,
loses, so to speak, all knowledge of gravitation; it follows a
preponderating different force. Jules Verne, a most gifted
genius for scientific philosophy, in his "a la lune'^ treats the
region of no weight which exists between earth and moon,
about 175,000 English miles from the earth and 25,000 miles
from the moon, most interestingly and charmingly. Our
souls enjoy, while reading this most clever fancy, the weight-
lessness of the body as thoroughly as if we possessed it. Of
course, in reality, with our present bodies, arteries and veins,
it would be death to us, because they are built for blood,
which has a moving weight; hence, if our blood was without
weight, our hearts, which work by a motor not driven by
weight, would drive this now weightless blood with many
times more force into our arteries; the entire distribution
would be interfered with, our skins would not hold the blood
back, our brains would burst, while our legs would become
bloodless, etc.; hence, a long education of our bodies would
be needed.

Only by absorbing every phase of Pantheos absorbable will
we progress. Whatever view of the origin of our present times
we may take, nowhere does prohibition — in its general prin-
ciple — appear as a sound, logical method of progress. If
Jehovah made the world, he, supposed to be so many mill-
ions of times wiser than man, knew precisely what was good
for man; if he had thought yeast, wine, whiskey, snakes, pes-
tilence, yellow fever, etc., not to be elements of progress he
would not have made them; he knew things better than even
a prohibitionist or the W. C. T. U. If Brama produced the
world, he had in view the ultimate return of all mankind
to himself, he therefore made nothing which would prevent
it. In Pantheos, all things are self purposes, only by prov-
ing itself really superior will any phase of Pantheos survive;
hence, every phase is needed to develop others; to prevent, by
prohibition, the development of a single hair to protect a
small surface of the body from a drop of rain, would have
meant final death of the entire species.

256

The Pantheistic logicon that, humano==eeiitrically, all
things exist to give man a chance to progress by utilizing
them harmoniously is reasonable. Some such things exist
solely to give us the practice of killing, of "eternal vigi-
lance,^^ of shrewd protection, of heroic deeds and conquest.

The proverb "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound
of cure'' may be correct in a few rare cases; if applied con-
sistently, all our progress would be impossible. A shallow
view of the world made this proverb; a somewhat deeper view
might be to say that a pound of cure is worth a pound of
prevention, and still more correct would be the view that for
humanity the pound of cure is invaluable, for the individual
the ounce of prevention wise. If our forefathers had killed
every person suffering from tuberculosis, they would have
left to-day so many more to be killed by other diseases, but
we would lack the knowledge, progress, art, self-sacrifice,
devotion, developed by tuberculosis; and, while we can see
already the time coming when tuberculosis will be as curable
as a broken arm, the science of medicine without tuberculosis
as one of its feeders, would be to-day at perhaps the stage of
Elias' reported spittle cure for leprosy. While alcohol pro-
duces drunkenness, it also produces the virtue of sobriety, of
self-control, of progress; all the drunkenness in the world
does not outweigh the virtues produced by properly master-
ing the use of alcohol.

Similar good logic applies to prohibition in every form,
not only that of alcohol. Thus, in 1897 there was a trifling
epidemic of dengue mixed with a few cases of yellow fever
in the states of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and
others; in all, 170 people died. The population in these re-
gions, in the apotheosis of cowardice, established a quaran-
tine system so barbarous that the damage done by it was
vastly more than the value of lives lost, not to speak of the
incalculable loss in courage, self-control, mutual helpfulness,
reward for a well-disciplined healthy body (survival). In
1898 the same cowardly despotism was repeated. It will take
only a few such experiences to keep capital, enterprise, im-
migrants and progress permanently away from these districts
and throw them into a state of relative barbarity, compared
with even Cuba or Mexico. All quarantines are in the serv-
ice of the unprogressive spirit of cowardice. What does it

25?

matter that some people on a ship have small pox? We meet
with it on land; all of ns who dfesire protection allow them-
selves to be vaccinated — ^voluntarily, not by compulsion!
To such an immune person a small pox case is less dangerous
than a case of hay-fever in a fellow-man. Hence, while it
is logical to put the sick into a hospital, it is unprogressive,
an eruption of the spirit of despoty, to detain those not sick,
to annoy and pester them, to interfere with commerce and
normal activity. How much superior to the inhabitants of
Jackson, Miss., who fled from their city (1898) because three
cases of yellow fever were discovered, were the inhabitants
of Munich, Germany, who, in 1874, with 260 deaths from
Cholera Asiatica in one day and 14,000 deaths during the
ten weeks of epidemic, did not even close the schools, thea-
ters, hotels, in fact continued on living as civilizedly and
bravely as in normal times? Those 150,000 in Munich had
just about 400 times more courage, sense and logic than the
10,000 who fled from Jackson, if measured by the death rate.
Besides, cholera claimed, in death, sixty-four per cent of lis
victims, while yellow fever rarely kills beyond twelve per
cent; in cholera our arts of medicine, nursing, drugs and skill
are almost entirely in vain, in yellow fever they constitute
three-fourths of the recovery and disease.

By giving the proper example of heroism, these Southern
states will inspire enterprise in the form of capital and en-
ergy to locate within their borders; but no enterprise can pros-
per if in danger of annual paralysis; we all love heroes and
despise cowards. Another important consideration lies in
the immunity secured by attacks of almost all infectious
diseases after once having survived one such attack. This
immunity is the reward which the Pantheos of the
Earth puts upon Valor. Which of two individuals is the high-
er, more enviable: he who can wander among dangers be-
cause they cannot hurt him, or he who has to take along
his clumsy fortress, cage or walls to keep out the danger?
However careful he may be, a weakness in his coarse de-
fenses may allow the enemy to enter and immediately he is
its victim; while, if we belong to the immune class, we have
a defense within our very bodies which, even during our
sleep, fights our battles.

It is a curious phenomenon, this immunity. In all proba-

258

bility^ the germs of a disease^ as^ perhaps^ in syphilis^ scarlet
fever, measles, do not live promiscuously on the substance
of our body, but only on certain rather rare constituents of
our tissues which, once consumed, baffle a second invasion
to get a hold; in certain other cases like small pox, etc., the
microbes may leave waste products in our systems which are
poisonous to germs of the same kind, although harmless to
us and to other germs; in still other cases — ^influenza — the
microbes may cause a change in the minute structure of our
cells so that, e. g., capillaries, formerly large enough to allow
them to pass, are now too small, and they are, therefore, es-
topped from general entrance into the body and are con-
sumed by our white blood corpuscles — ^a fierce microbe war-
rior—before doing general harm.

We have almost arrived at that stage of knowledge where
we may say that all diseases are produced by some form of
life — ^living germs — ^while the symptoms are often due to
their products or efforts of our bodies of vanquishing fhem.
With every breath we inhale thousands of all kinds of germs
of pneumonia, tuberculosis, colitis, purulency, tetanus, hy-
drophobia, etc. Why do w^e not suffer of these diseases more
frequently? Because the structure of our noses and lungs
is so closely woven that these germs do not enter through
them, and even if they do, there is immediately an army of
white blood corpuscles ready to pounce upon them; only
if these leucocytes are weak, out of practice, so to speak,
from excessive quarantining, will they succumb and we will
have the battle transferred from the surface of our mucous
membrane to our systems. A "cold" is such a fight against
microbes which have passed beyond the interior mucus sur-
face of our noses. Our lungs, through ages of practice, have
learned to secrete a very small amount of a slimy fluid, — a
mere moisture — which contains poisons for many varieties
of germs or microbes. Our stomachs are equally strong.
One need only observe the Eussian soldier eating with evi-
dent relish and without detriment to his health his rye bread
baked four weeks ago, now covered with a green mould on the
surface and in the sponge holes, to realize the strength of
the stomach^s digestive power. One has only to read of catho-
lic saints in the fifth or sixth centuries — quite numerous —
who, to show their "crucifying of the flesh," licked, without

259

lad hygienic results, the expectorations from the stones of
the streets, to admire the efficacy of our stomachic juices.
But this efficacy was not acquired by quarantines, it was ac-
quired by survival of the fittest. The existence of typhoid
fever, colitis, dysentery, cholera morbus, trichinosis, etc.,
shows that there remain yet w^eak spots in our systems, be-
cause the germs of these diseases, either survive the action
of the digestive fluids, or entering our as yet too large capil-
laries and lymphatics, reaching organs where they specifically
live, breed or find an outlet. The effect of exercise and
practice on the skill of our stomachs in killing noxious germs
is well illustrated by the phenomenon that, e. g., the inhabi-
tants of Munich, 1860-1880, were rarely attacked by ty-
phoid fever which was endemic in that city, but strangers
very frequently; the natives had, through mild, constant in-
fection, learnt how to handle the microbes, the strangers
froni lands believing in quarantines, prohibition, etc., were
the natural victims, like physiological hayseeds in a patho-
logically wicked city.

It is a well known experience that measles are mild in
children, severe ii\ adults; the reverse with diphtheria and
c^oup; hence, it is reasppable to even endeavor to have chil-
dren catch the measles as chil Jren,but to protect them against
diphtheria. Especially in the latter disease we are only be-
ginning to understand it; it is a relatively new disease. Dis-
eases, which are nothing but history of certain microbes
within mankind, have their cycles. Leprosy is to-day prac-
tically extinct; the bubonic plague rarely attacks Europeans
now, but was terribly destructive in 1347 to 1350 when about
60,000,000 died in Europe— 80,000 out of 100,000 then living
in Strassburg, etc.; syphilis appeared first in about 1500
and is already waning, becoming milder, less infectious; small
pox depopulated entire islands of Indians in 1500 (Puerto
Eico), to-day it is rare, mild and beyond its zenith. Diph-
theria is in the ascendancy; colitis is gaining; tuberculosis
has passed its zenith; Asiatic cholera is stationary; pneu-
monia is in a slow ascendancy; yellow fever in the decline;
malaria in a rapid decline; influenza in the ascendancy;
neuro-hysteria (hay-fever sneezing death, hiccoughing death)
very mild or almost extinct; goitre in rapid descendancy;
cancer in slow ascendancy; pyaemia, septicaemia in precip-

260

itate decline; tetanus and hydrophobia are declining; pure
'^circular insanity" about stationary or perhaps on a slight
increase; dipsomania on the decline, etc. Humanity at large
has to catch the rhythm of these cycles if we want to be best
prepared to resist the diseases; the fever in a disease is fre-
quently made by the body with the purpose of killing the
germs by the excessive heat. As in all things human, a reas-
onable mixture of prevention and cure constitute progress;
to go to one or the other extreme leads to destruction. We
should expose ourselves to reasonable degrees of danger from
diseases and should rely partly on the ability of our physi-
icians or our innate strength for a cure. Hence, while it
is reasonable to isolate a ship with an entire crew stricken
with pernicious yellow fever, it is despotic and unprogressive
to isolate any ship simply because it comes from an "infected
port," or, worse yet, to quarantine states of 80,000 square
miles because on a couple of square miles a few. people are
sick; a petty tyrant is always the worst tyrant.

Since the idea of microbes became popular, the shallow
majority of people and physicians immediately proceeded
to advise the extermination of all microbes, recommending
the sole use of sterilized food, sterilized water, sterilized bread,
etc. We cannot yet say what the punishment of this ex-
cess will be. We forget too easily that for every species of
harmful microbes there exist two species of useful, even nec-
essary germs; our pancreas is an enormous microbe breeder;
without hundreds of species tamed and utilized in our bodies
we could not live; e. g., our red and white blood corpuscles
are both well trained, useful microbes. We may be in danger
of depriving our bodies of important microbes by oversteri-
lizing our food and, while not visible now, many lay the
foundation to terrible epidemics, -because we have killed
our interior warriors, or may suffer as a race from general
debility or sterility in fifty or a hundred years. For instance,
no grain could grow without the niter-breeding microbes at
its roots; no sterilized plant grows in perfectly sterilized
soil; in a similar manner our very lives may depend on mi-
crobes in our drinking water.

One small branch of this retardative despotic quar-
antine system is the prohibition of alcohol. The
usual treatises and speeches of the violent advocates

261

of this form of tyranny form the most typical speci-
mens of bad logic, mild insanity, noisy shallowness, we
can find in print. Jehovah gave the vine to Noah, Jesus
even transformed water into good, strong, intoxicating wine,
no "unfermented grape juice,'^ he even drank alcoholic wine,
but — ^a W. C. T. U. dares to advocate total prohibition.
With such illogicality in the very name — ^thoroughly femi-
nine — nothing but unreasonable tyranny can be expected. To-
day Arabs, Mahommetans, Turks and many Hindoo sects are
total abstainers; are they superior to the German or French-
man in any respect? Annually over $1,000,000,000 are
spent in the United States for drinks, or nearly $50 per
adult man. Maine has had prohibition of liquor for fifty
years. Do we find there a surplus wealth of $600,000,000
which the 260,000 adult men have saved? Is Kansas to-
day by $200,000,000 richer than Arkansas, owing
to the saving on liquor? No! It can easily be followed out
that, while $1,000,000,000 are spent annually for liquor,
somebody else receives $1,000,000,000, spends it again, etc.,
and prohibition would simply remove the spending and re-
ceiving of the amount, or reduce *T)usiness" by that much.
To-day Kansas and Maine are stationary, attract no new
immigrants, have mediocre enterprise, mediocre sobriety,
mediocre virtue. There is no better means of weeding out
the shiftless, aimless, shallow, coarse, than the flowing bowl;
they get drowned in it, while the sober, self-restrained, self-
denying survive. At the same time the. entire movement
of prohibition has produced an appeal to "good manners,'^
which made it more of a "disgrace^^ to be a drunkard than
formerly, and has thereby held many a weak character who
cares for gossips and meddlers, until it grew strong, hence
has served, indirectly, a good purpose. The ideal man is not
he who is sober because he cannot get any liquor to become
drunk; it is he who drinks because he knows alcohol does him
good, because it is progressive, or abstains for the same rea-
sons; the man without money cannot be called an honest
cashier, nor can the ugly opinionated nagging old maid
without even a "gentleman acquaintance" be called virtuous.
All real conscious virtue implies a chance of sinning met by
self control refraining from it; hence, abolishing chances of
ainning abolishes also virtues; puts a premium on lack of

262

character, produces monotony, uninteresting mediocrity and
dullness. Worse yet becomes prohibition, If it does not re-
place the thing prohibited by something to take its place.
Most people need some stimulant to become sociable; even
common saloon sociability, bringing people into intellectual
contact is progressive; the Arab who goes to bed with the
setting sun is not sociable; in many countries the sociable
evening is the stimulus of life; only countries where people
meet evenings, exchange ideas, discuss questions of the day,
business, etc., have become foremost. A certain amount of
an alcoholic stimulant arouses the intellect beyond the nat-
ural tendency of recluseness. Many stimulants, like coffee,
tea, morphine, hashish, muscarine do not produce the social
form of stimulation produced by moderate amounts of wine,
beer, even brandy and "grog;^^ they produce a silent "still
drunk" condition of no benefit to social intercourse, and
rather destructive to the individual. The false notion that
every drinker becomes sooner or later a drunkard is per-
fectly consistent with the lie in the title of the W. C. T. U.
The W. C. T. U. mother who grieves herself into sickness
because her boy came home "drunkj" deserves her grief, if
she does not know that, properly handled, that boy may get
drunk perhaps half a dozen times in his entire successful
life of 70 years, but will surely become a chronic drunkard
if she keeps nagging, fussing and worrying about it, if she
makes that boy's home uncongenial, strained, uncomfortable
for him by her loving, selfish, harsh despotism. Very few, if
any, of history's real great men have been total abstainers
from alcohol, much rather sinners in the other direction.
Jesus drank intoxicating wine, Buddha was a total abstainer,
so was Mahommet. St. Paul drank wine; Shakespeare was
frequently drunk; Newton drank, so did Plato, Kepler, Co-
pernicus, Socrates. Gladstone and Bismark were drinkers,
so were the generals Grant, Sherman, Moltke, Napoleon,
Cesar, Alexander. Most chemists and physicians are mod-
erate drinkers, etc.

While other factors also enter, the sociability around the
beer, wine or whiskey table is an enormous factor in mutual
contact, co-operation, enterprise and progress of a nation.
The most typical specimen of non-alcoholic hilarious socia- •
l)ility is the New England "church sociable/* With quiet

263

gliding steps the clergyman moves from group to group who,
in subdued voices, tell each other what a splendid time they
are having; he shakes the hand of the stranger softly and
whispers to him: "We are having a splendid time;" intro-
duces that stranger to the dowager of the church who smiles
beamingly, while she confides to him in almost inaudible
tones: "We are having a splendid time." Of course, the
stranger looks for the corpse of the funeral, until somebody
explains to him that those people are amusing themselves
hugely and uproariously.

If they believed it, it would be a high form of content-
ment, but let anybody joke or hint something about alcohol,
beer, wine and the sly looks and smiles, sparkling eyes, and
nudges, show that there is a forbidden fruit hidden which
would be ever so nice "if we only dared." American woman
deprives herself of much of the enjoyment of life by not shar-
ing her husband's pleasures, friends, sociability; the German
matron, in spite of her many children, would not exchange
with her for all Mrs. Grundy's. Temptation is the school
of progress. Character which is nothing but ability to con-
quer temptation cannot even be defined without it, does
not exist where there is no temptation. Adam in the myth-
ical paradise had no character, his experience with a simple
apple showed that his entire moral nature was not worth an
apple core; ninety-nine per cent of the "virtue," especially of
women, is of the same grade, namely, ignorance, cowardice
or lack of desire or chance. (See Gen. iii, 16.)

Thus, the petty ridiculous subject of cigarette smoking is
made a legislative subject in the United States — the only
country on earth and that one claiming special pre-eminence
in liberty, freedom, etc.; in many states the sale of cigarettes
is forbidden. The coarsest ignorance on the subject pre-
vails: "Cigarettes contain opium," one of the common silly
lies. Is the maker such a fanatical supporter of the (Chris-
tian) English opium warriors against the ^Tieathen" (? ?)
Chinese (1856), that he spends $15 a pound for opium to
put into cigarettes of which 1,000 are sold for $2? Nothing
less than two grains of opium produces any effect, besides it
has to be prepared just before use, reducing its weight to
one-half; with a tax of $1 per thousand cigarettes, he cannot
afford to put even a fume of opium into his products and

264

make profit. For experiment, the author saturated some
cigarettes with opium; the eflfeet of smoking them was merely
a dry throat, not even a trace of the opium effects was no-
ticeable. To smoke or not smoke them is just like cigar
smoking, pipe smoking, tobacco chewing, snuff chewing,
snuff priming, opium smoking, bethel chewing, areca chew-
ing, clove, peppermint, ginger, coffee chewing, a personal
affair which even by the crudest principles of crudest liberty
should be left free from legal tyranny.

Children, on the other hand, owing to their low state of
intellect, are very properly wards of the nation in a fair, rea-
sonable degree; their wildness and animality of desires, likes
and dislikes which, left free, would reduce the world to
simian barbarity, may be logically restricted and their lib-
erty transferred to the parents in the form of untrammeled
control over their offspring, even legal responsibility for all
the misdeeds of the children. It is just to fine the parents
of a young thief of from 6 to 18 years of age the full pen-
alty of the act, if they neglected his bringing up.

XXV.

THE PANTHEOS OF JUSTICE.

This phase of Pantheos belongs to a grade of development
certainly beyond Jehovah, because Jehovah represents him-
self as a judge, hence a servant of justice. If he were jus-
tice and judge himself he would be merely an imitation of
a cheap human, Tammany, police court tyrant. This Pan-
theos of Justice is beyond that of religion, because in all re-
ligions certain things are declared just or right, others unjust
or wrong, without giving any reason within that religion
why they should be so, except logic which is the justice of
reasoning. It extends beyond the Pantheos of Nationalism,
as the fact proves that Japanese, Chinese, English, Yankees,
Germans, Zulus^ etc., have all about the same idea of what
Justice should be as an ideal; as soon as it becomes an
American justice, a Spanish justice, etc., it is no longer pure
justice; it is a mongrel between Justice and Nationalism or
a subjugation of Justice to Nationalism and like all — ^tem-
porary, unless voluntary — submissions of a higher phase to

266

a lower phase of Pantheos sure to bring troublesome results,
when the higher Pantheos will free itself again from its en-
slavement by the lower one.

What is the Pantheos of Justice? We can only define it
from forms it assumes perceptible to us. It is what we call
in logic consistency or harmony; in physics it is the law:
Every action produces a back-action* equal to it. In our acts
towards ourselves a rigid consistency of acts and their har-
mony with our Ego; in our acts towards others the full re-
alization that our fellow citizens are only we ourselves under
a different name, face, garb, surroundings. Justice within
the family does not differ from justice to our fellowmen, but
there is added unto it the justice of emotions, of love, even
hatred, friendship and indifference which we do not give to
promiscuous acquaintances. Within the Pantheos of Na-
tions Justice finds its personification in the execution of the
leading idea that nations are only groups of Egos, of our own
Egos in our own nation, only speaking different tongues,
of different customs, etc. In religion the Pantheos of Jus-
tice demands a fair impartial weighing of the claims of as
many religions as we can reasonably handle; justice to our-
selves restricts us to a few; into morals Justice enters as
the principle of Confucius: treat others as you would like to
be treated by them. It then passes beyond our direct vision.
How Justice enters into the phases of Molecules, Planets,
Solar Systems we cannot clearly define. At some other place
the author will treat of this. Justice then passes on, it goes
into the grave with us, it reappears with us at our next ap-
pearance. As what? Beyond Justice, linked harmoniously
with it, will appear Fate more clearly outlined beyond the
grave than we know now; beyond Fate — ^Law, beyond Law —
Harmony, beyond Harmony — Perfection, beyond Perfection
the great Unknown, yet illions of phases below the Pantheos
of All.

By allying ourselves most strongly with Justice we can-
not possibly go wrong; by not making Justice our slave, sub-
mitting it to our selfishness, family feelings, even to patriot-
ism, even religion and morals, but by being a servant of pure
Justice will we be sure, in the "beyond-the-grave" to have

♦We prefer the word back-action as clearer than re-action, which
has at least 5 meanings.

2G6

Justice as our defender against Fate or Law, if needs be, in
our march towards Harmonious Perfection. Plato means
Justice when he exalts Virtue.

Hence the primal duty of a true Pantheist, one who for the
first time realizes the true gradation of the phases (see chap-
ter 8) will be to fight for Justice in every form even beyond
pure Liberty. Justice is not a stern phase of Pantheos, all
true lasting pleasure is built upon true justice. Fate, now in
our ignorance, has a stern hard aspect to us; but Fate
utilizes the laws of nature, it cannot change them, hence it
is below those Laws or perhaps merely one of them highly
complex, but not above the Pantheos of Law. With "LaV
in this sense we do not mean the enactments of legislatures
although they may represent the personification of the Pan-
theos of Law within the body politic, but we mean the "Law
of nature,'^ the chemical, physical, logical, moral laws.

Fate is the result of law and other higher and lower phases
of Pantheos, when viewed as acting along a single phase of
Pantheos in the element of time, be this phase a molecule or
an Ego in its course through the past and future; in the
past. Fate is its History, hence Fate, in the usual sense of
the word, is future history; and, as the complete history of
the past was dependent on the phases of Pantheos called
Law, Justice, etc., thus will the history of the future or
Fate be dependent on law and on preceding effects of law,
or upon the history of the past modified by Justice.

A different shading from "Fate" has the word "Des-
tiny." While Fate is future history, Destiny might be
called future potentiality, or the mixture of Law with Fate
and Harmonious Perfection. We have to stop here because
our vision does not extend beyond. Destiny carries in itself
more of the higher phases than Fate; we may be said to de-
termine our own fate, but our destiny is determined by the
higher phases of Pantheos with whom we are enabled to
place ourselves in touch and harmony.

A true Pantheist must therefore always be a rigid de-
fender of justice in its lowest and highest recognizable forms.
Where these clash with selfishness or the false attitude of
ranking self as the highest phase of Pantheos, or with family
pride, an attitude which falsely considers family as the high-
est phase of Pantheos, or with a false patriotism which places

267

our nation as the highest ideal or with a false exaltation of a
specific religion which, in the sense used here, means the
placing of the god of a certain religion as the highest phase
of Pantheos, or even with our morals which means here our
recognized best code of living; the Pantheist must stand up
for Justice, but he can blend it with the phases of love,
brotherhood, harmony and perfection without doing it any
violence, far from it, rather ennobling and uplifting it.
Hence the Pantheist who does Justice the greatest service
tries to defend it in a manner least offensive, least harsh,
most friendly, most convincing; the one who combines ele-
ments of polish in every way with competency and a deep
holy purpose for Justice is the most powerful advocate, not he
who considers a certain coarse brutal truth the highest state
of Justice; severity is not Justice, it is frequently a great
mockery of Justice, an imitation of low phases of Pantheos
of Justice in a higher phase. Justice, like all other higher
phases of Pantheos, enslaved and made to serve lower phases
of Pantheos is injustice and a "vice;" when dominating them
a "virtue." All "vices" and "virtues" will stand for their
definition this criterion. Thus, the thug who, at the point
of a revolver, secures my property represents Justice in the
service of the lower selfishness of the thug; it represents the
"unjust" laws and conditions which made the thug a possi-
bility and I, as a sufferer, may in the present or past have
contributed to those conditions which now made the thug.
With perfect Justice — i. e., no unsatisfied back-actions —
since past eternity in all phases of Pantheos accessible to
Justice no thug would now exist; hence Justice in the ser-
vice of the Ego of the thug brings to me my fate, spins the
fate of the thug and when again freed destroys the thug
for having enslaved it. This delayed Justice is merely the
delayed back-action of some, perhaps long ago, occurring
action. We may say that our whole future fate and des-
tiny depends on giving the phase of Pantheos called Justice
its proper weight and place, namely, above all lower phases
up to law; we cannot carry to-day Justice beyond Law,
meaning by Law always the principle of certain causes pro-
ducing certain effects under certain circumstances with a
precision that can be foretold, hence the Laws of Nature.
This importance of Justice appears powerfully on the death-

268

bed. Most people, not brought up under specially harsh
denominational training, seek consolation and hope in that
supreme moment in the frequently hypocritical: I have
wronged nobody, my actions have not left behind unsat-
isfied back-actions.

Matters of religious detail such as, whether Buddha left
his footprint at Mt. Adams in Ceylon or whether Mahommet
had two or one pigeon whispering the Koran to him or
whether the last supper represented a simple meal or a
portentous religious ceremony, appear frivolous, shallow at
the deathbed; we even do not care whether Mary was a virgin
or not, but our concern is: "Have I wronged somebody?"
This "wronged" is explained later. The Pantheos of Jus-
tice now appears to us in its true importance, although the
phrase: have I wronged? expresses only the negative side.
Omissive acts or a failure to take a positive just course is
just as blameworthy as positive acts against our best ideals
of Justice. Justice needs still the harmony of Fate, Des-
tiny and Law to become Harmonious Perfection, beyond
which it passes our vision. Justice, like all phases of Pan-
theos, started in the illionth past, its passage through the
molecules, the geological periods, is in a to us not very clearly
outlined form of the principle which demands a back-action
equal to an action; it entered the monkey and butterfly, man
and wasp; in our Egos it obtains a conscious, though low as
yet, existence, only with us and through us can it reach
Terrestrial Perfection. If we fall short of it, as a race, the
human race will not be utilized by those higher phases be-
yond its possibilities, but the Egos which have proved them-
selves progressive exponents will be carried by Justice while
carrying Justice higher and higher. All of them together,
on earth and in the stars, united by the mysterious band of
"principles of Justice" are constituting the entire Pantheos
of Justice, whose destiny is thus identified with that of its
components. No matter whether in the year of our era of
say 55,000,000 our earth falls into the sun, carrying our
Egos with us; we are still united in a body within the Pan-
theos of Justice which is entirely independent of tempera-
ture, gravitation, heat and molecular forces. The more we
ally ourselves with phases of Pantheos which we can reason-
ably suppose to be unaffected by the reactions of coarse

2GD

chemistry and physics, although subject to the grand Pan-
theos of Law, the more will we be immortal.

This view of Justice, as being the physical principle which
demands for every action an exact equivalent of back-action
satisfied may be beautifully illustrated by the following: A
cannon ball is fired into the air; as the ball leaves the muzzle,
the gun "kicks" and the ball, through the gun, kicks the
earth away from it; the momentum of the flying ball (action)
— in mathematics mv^-f-2 — is equal to that of the earth
kicked away (back-action). The ball is flying through the
air; as it flies, the gravitation of the earth continues to draw
the ball to the earth and the earth to the ball until the ball
has again fallen to the ground, again kicked away the earth,
is again rebounded, etc. When the ball is again on the
ground, the earth is again in ALMOST the same spot. This
almost is here vital. If the ball had fallen back into the
muzzle of the gun, had not dispelled air, heated air, bored a
hole into the ground, had not become heated itself, etc., thd
back-action might become perfectly satisfied and earth ano,
ball return to original conditions; but a certain amount oi'
b^ck-action remains unsatisfied, free, and may and will ap
pear later in the most curious manner, unexpected, almost
untraceable, as a storm, an increase of dew, a mild earth-
quake, etc.

The figures of this curious phenomenon are well estab-
lished. If the ball weighs 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) and
flies 12 kilometers (8 miles) it kicks the earth back about
1 : 700,000,000,000,000 millimeters (about 1 : (17)th of an
inch); hence a distance not yet even noticeable in our finest
instruments.

Justice is not the action or the back-action, it is the prin-
ciple which demands their equality and final satisfaction. It
is especially those small hidden fractions of old back actions
and actions which produce to-day many of the mysterious
"accidents" of luck, ill luck, misery, abundance.

Thus, a person (A) lost some money, one of the back-
actions is his grief. I find it, am rejoiced, my joy is again a
back-action of which his (A's) grief is the action. In justice
I want to settle this action, I try to find the owner, I fail.
I justly keep the money. In some future time (say 8,000,000
years) the owner appears; a host of actions and back-actions

270

were latent, hidden. Justice requires their satisfaction; the
original owner (A) may be a spark of fire; the money found
may be my house. (A) tries to destroy some property of mine,
to return to me his (A's) grief, which was long ago my joy so
long that I have forgotten it, that original grief might now
be satisfied, but new actions and back-actions may have been
set up. When A received his money, he may have cheated
somebody, somebody back of A may have more right to the
money, that somebody (C) may be a drop of water; it may
fall on A before A has succeeded in taking the money away
from me by fire; C is revenged, it kills the spark A, but
in back-action is itself evaporated, etc.*

Thus, all our tramps, criminals, beggars may be either
undeveloped, lagging behind, human beings of the past
shoved into our times, or they may be men of our times
pushed into conditions of primitiveness by our undue crowd-
ing ahead, our narrow, selfish laws or conditions of human
life. If their case is the first one the back-action will not
fall on us, but if the second, we, having excited the action,
are beholden to Justice for the back-action.

In many cases action and back-action are pleasant, useful
and equally desirable; in many others, however, one is an
excess of pleasure, the other an excess of pain; as all pleasure

•How deep, interwoven, complex the inter-working of phases of
Pantheos is, was illustrated most forcibly right at this point to the
author. He had Just inserted the above Uttle illustration and written
a small chapter on Buddhism, showing its superiority to Christianity,
not in the silly elephant stories, 6th heaven, 4th heaven, but in its
deep Brama-essence, had made a few cuts to illustrate the self-
imposed suffering for Justice of "fakirs," left the room for a few
hours and on return, found it a wreck from a fire originating in
neighboring room ; no traceable cause, probably mice ; the fire destroyed
utterly the chapter on Buddhism, maimed another chapter which is not
in the book, because on closer study the author found it a little too de-
tailed, technical; singed and edged the balance; but did no material
damage because of good fair insurance. Evidently in this chapter some
ancient revengeful phase felt hurt; through the complex natural laws
this hurt was foreshadowed perhaps 20,000 years ago, kept silent all
this time, deeply latent, but at the proper moment burst out; the
purposes were all there, but human progress, as shown in an excellent
flre department, insurance system, a kind passerby, all agents of
progress in whose service the author aims to work, met the ancient
revenge and the damage was a mere inconvenience. But the photo-
graphic cuts and the article on Buddhism could not be found in spite
of the fact that every other page of the manuscript was recovered.
The hurry of the work did not allow to insert it again. Perhaps the
author was unfair and Justice threw out the unfair chapter, or else
some influence from chapter XIV (Miss Willard) was exerted. At any
rate, no real damage was done, proving to the author that in sum
total the effort of a Just philosophy as attempted in this little book,
was not hostile to the domineering phases of Pantheos, merely to
some sub-phases.

2ri

must produce an equivalent of pain, we have to exercise our
greatest care not to suffer. The most perfect form of hu-
man progress aims to distribute the pain over many while
the pleasure is concentrated on few; every one is one of the
few in many cases. Our bodies in every sensation meet this
principle of Justice. For instance, to procure to us the
agreeable taste of some strawberries, these strawberries have
to die, perhaps the aggregate of their pain of death equals
the pleasure of our eating them; we enjoy some music, it
may be that the principle of pain, in a specific form, goes
through the strings of a piano while we pick up this pain
with our ears and enjoy it as pleasure. Our sexual pleasures
represent ages of stored up pains of mothers and women.
Woman is still to-day in the aggregate suffering far more
sexual pains than she can experience as sexual pleasures; is
not this the philosophy of her greater pains? Through her
offspring she, so to speak, distributes the back-action of that
pain, namely, sexual pleasures to her male and female chil-
dren alike; they are latent, stored in some very dim form in
those children, until sexual maturity brings them out.

Human mothers are not the only ones to suffer more pain
than their mates. All through the list of beings on earth,
the females suffer fully as much as women. There is little
question that in the purely sexual pleasures woman does not
get back the equivalent of her sexual pains. Where do we
men store the pain which is the reaction or our sex-
ual pleasures? There is no such violent reaction, fatigue or
depression follow^ing as would be an equivalent. Hence, as
a suggestion, the idea presented might be worth the attention
of analytical minds.

It seems true that a woman derives more genuine pleasure
from a true love affair — aside from all sexual elements —
than a man, but this may only balance her pain of mind
during her condition previous to childbirth; it is hardly an
equivalent for the almost monthly aches and troubles of all
kind.

A person sells some chewdng gum at Ic. a package; it is a
slight pain for every purchaser to part with this Ic; the
aggregate of the back-action of this slight pain, the seller
receives in the form of a good deal of pleasure at his increas-
ing wealth; but the consumer of this chewing gum derives

272

some pleasure from chewing it; this pleasure is at the ex-
pense of some molecular pain within the chewing gum, or if
it is not healthful to his body, at the expense of his glands of
salivation, stomach, etc. The maker of the chewing gum
lias only capacity for a small part of the stored up pleasure
from the many little Ic. pains; it remains, so to speak, on
the books of Justice as a credit; when he dies his heirs, for-
merly poor, inherit his money; they have great capacity for
pleasure and Justice gives them from the account of the
chewing gum maker as much as they can handle or is left.

The old monks who castigated themselves, fasted, tortured
themselves were merely, so to speak, cunning epicureans,
who wanted to taste the disagreeable dishes before the more
delicious ones. They stored up into futurity a back-action
of pleasures. Buddhism to-day practices the principle most
extensively.

The roue first uses up in his pleasures the pains of his
mothers, grandmothers and ancestors, then he, so to speak,
borrows on the future until Justice finds that he has over-
drawn his account of what he can atone in possible pain
within his fate and refuses him further pleasures. Many
such in later life are merely squaring accounts with justice
when they cry out with pain from gout, delirium tremens,
neuralgia, etc. Many realize their debt by turning: Jeune
cocotte, vieille bigotte!

Before we can reach Harmonious Perfection, Justice must
be satisfied, which again proves that Harmonious Perfec-
tion is beyond Justice, although dependent on it and only
reachable through it. Hence our only safe course would
seem to avoid excessive extreme courses in anything and
chiefly of all not to shirk pain; we will make sure by suffer-
ing it, that our account will be balanced.

Humanity as a whole may even be so interwoven that the
pains and pleasures of all will find their back-action within
pleasures and pains of all, so that the sum total of all pleas-
ure of humanity equals that of all the pain of humanity, and
that the stock of both is limited unless both are carefully
cultivated. It is a curious observation that the blas6 pleas-
ure surfeited are usually youth hardly beyond 30 years of
age. Our age has not increased at all proportionately our
capacity for pleasure. Is it because the art of medicine, of

273

surgery, of philanthropy has so materially diminished the
stock of pain within humanity and transferred it to mole-
cules or drugs? Thus, if a dentist uses nitrous oxide while
or before extracting teeth, the patient is placed into a very
pleasurable intoxication, while the pain from his tooth goes

to ? — the dentist? Not at all! The nitrous oxide?

It must be so. The nitrous oxide receives in some form
what we call pain and returns to the man the back-action
called in man pleasure. What it is within nitrous oxide we
don't know. But this pain of that patient has gone be-
yond humanity into the nitrous oxide; the pleasure was an
individual one and, after passing off, is lost to humanity also.
At some time in some form the pain from that tooth will
return into humanity while humanity has to give up to that
nitrous oxide the pleasure received. This may be an un-
pleasant aspect of narcosis. Are some of the pains of dis-
eases, as in cancer, returnings of ancient back-actions for
ancient pleasures received. or preparations for some future
pleasure to be received?

Thus, the alcohol drinker experiences certain pleasurable
sensations; if he goes only to a certain point, no painful
back-action follows; is the grade of pleasure up to this point
the limit to which humanity has developed its pleasure facil-
ity with an equalization by a pain not unbearable or notice-
able? If he goes beyond, his headache, malaise, misery qn
the day following square his account of pleasure, at least in
part.

Humanity is seeking more and more refined means of en-
joyment. Probably everybody has experienced a feeling of
disappointment at not being able to enjoy more intensely
a particularly fine chance. When we look at the falls of
Niagara we can feel that our feelings are not doing justice
to the grandeur. The author was at the World's Fair at
Vienna, 1873. It was then the finest exhibit of human activ-
ity. He came home so exceedingly exhausted from the ex-
cess of pleasurable impressions that in 1893 the very idea of
thinking to go to Chicago for a similar exhibit produced a
deep aversion and a feeling of strain and fatigue. Man is
as yet not educated to one millionth of the capabilities for
pleasure and pain in his large bulky body. And still, a well
defined group within every state wants to suppress the few

274

priviate colleges for it by declaring games of all kind illegal
(Massachuestts, Alabama, Persia, Thibet, Korea). What
does all the progress of electricity and sciences help us, if we
do not improve in the capacity of enjoying them? Again, as
we said in another chapter, even Justice demands the culti-
vation of our capacity, pleasure and pain.

How far our human Laws are as yet from Justice is illus-
trated by the act of a court in York state (1898), declaring
a man and woman "not married," although she had borne
him a child, but another woman to wHom he was "married"
at the same time, for 5 years without offspring, his lawful
wife, entitled to his property, merely because of an entirely
immaterial printed rag called wedding certificate. Law is
frequently the apotheosis of formality without substance.

XXVI.
WHAT MAKES LIFE WOETH LIVING?

Everybody will answer this question differently; to most
it is money; to many, good health; to many, pleasures; to
some, work; to a few, duty; to several, the chance of pre-
paring for future life; to almost all, a preponderance of
things agreeable over things disagreeable, of pleasure over
pain, of enjoyment over loathing. Some indeed live, and
not few, because they are simply too much afraid of death
and the future to take the chance of suicide. The art of
enjoyment is as yet far behind our intellectual progress.

It is essentially our fault if we don't enjoy life. Every-
thing we meet may be transformed into a source of joy or
of pain and sorrow. Poles — not telegraph poles or Polan-
ders or fish poles — ^but antithetic points ( — nice language, 3
meanings for one word! — ) are essential elements of all
pleasure; without pain no pleasure or at least only a lovr
grade of it. Why are so many rich, healthy, intelligent peo-
ple unhappy? Because they never tasted poverty, maimed-
ness, stupidity, so as to be able to enjoy the difference. Why
are so many people in the country complaining of its dull-
ness and long to be in a city and vice versa? Because it is
change and difference, which is one of the chief elements of
pleasure. But, to thoroughly enjoy life, we have to receive

275

an education in pleasure just as much as we receive one' in
Mathema-tics or Music.

Of the various pleasures making life enjoyable we will
only enumerate very few.

There is the sense of sight. Some delight in seeing peo-
ple, others in scenery, still others in the sight of the firma-
ment; let us teach our children to enjoy all by their seeing
us enjoying them; the father who at night, when his boy
comes up to him and says: Oh tell me, papa, what are all
those stars? answers him: "Them's stars, don't ask silly
questions,'^ misses as much his duty as the one who does not
feed the boy enough. From morning till night the eye is
furnishing us with one continued round of a most marvel-
lous optical exhibit without cost or trouble. Of course,
those whose eyes see only bonnets and gaudy rags, who only
see advertisements of eatables and drinkables, who only see
and want to see the interior of stuffy offices with filthy col-
ored paper wads called money, do not cultivate the capacity
of the eye and, when later in life these limited objects of
interest for them disappear from their views, they find that
life has lost its spice. There is to the author no grander
view than a beautiful landscape with rugged mountains,
abysses, cascades, sombre and bright trees and tints; there
are millions of those to be seen on our globe without even
an admission fee; some say the starry heaven is more sub-
lime; it has to the author too much the element of immu-
tability, there is not enough life in it; a thunder shower
is grand, the ocean at rest and in a storm is grand. Let us
cultivate the love of things grand in our children, they will
thank us more for it than for 100 so-called Christian Sun-
days,* the most horrible, frightful abuse and waste of a beau-
tiful useful day that can be found in any religion. . If your
Jehovah made the world will he not be pleased vastly more,
if you walk out into his handiwork, his nature and admire
his skill, than if you drone or doze in your stuffy houses or
shriek with your unmusical voices shallow platitudes called
religious hymns at him. Of course, man must be under

*By this is only understood that curious English notion of a
Jewish Saturday, only practised on Sunday in Engrlish lands, so in-
sufferably dull and absurd that we could not make any reader in any
non-Engrlish country believe that It really existed, if they had not
undergone it.

276

shelter at times and many find comfort and solace in the
words of a strong preacher, but, for real sublimity a man-
made work can compare but poorly with a truly Pantheos-
made nature; man's poor voice is but a croak compared with
the rustle of a wind in the leaves, the roar of a gale in the
caiion, the rush of a Niagara over the crags, or the pounding
of the billows in the surf.

But also in man and his work does the eye find pleasure
almost without end; the pictures of artists, the cheap chro-
mos of the shops, even the crude sketches of the newspapers
are sources of a certain degree of pleasure; the beautiful tints
of aniline upon silk rival the plumage of birds and the bril-
liancy of the flowers. Works like the Brooklyn bridge, the
noblest testimony of man's genius — poor Roebling, like every
true genius, paid with his sanity for the work — ^inspire us.
Nothing grander, more graceful, useful and beautiful was
ever built by man in any land than this bridge. As the
Indian chief, after being shown all the great buildings of
Washington, New York and Chicago answered, when asked
what was the greatest thing he saw: "My braves can pile
stone upon stone, they can hew and join timber, but they
cannot draw a spiderweb of steel across a part of the mighty
ocean."

Even the sight of man himself and his fellowmen and
women is very frequently a source of pleasure or at least a
source of pleasing interest. A beautiful face, being the
stamp of harmony of some kind, is always a pleasurable view,
greater yet is the pleasure, if the sight is mixed with pleas-
ant sentiments. We must also keep in mind that the pleas-
ure of reading, studying, learning is in the first place a gift
of our eyes. We can certainly say that our eyes furnish us
80 per cent of all real pleasure in life. How great must
that total be, if most blind people, with only the remaining
20 per cent at their disposal, still find life worth living?

Our pleasures of the ear embrace nature's sounas from
the roar of thunder to the chirping of the cricket, the voice
of our pets, of our friends, lovers and family members; hut
especially this organ shows us the possibilities for pain and
displeasure; we have to hear not only the charming voice of
our sweetheart, but also the harsh, shrieking, nagging words
of the shrew; the laughter of mirth and the bawling of stupid

277

babies all have to be admitted to our ears. There are many
to whom music is the supreme delight who would rather be
bom blind than deaf; we must cultivate in our children even
ever so poor a trace of taste for music!

The joys of taste are numerous, very real and, because of
their intensity and variety, ought to be cultivated extensive-
ly; the person who eats little but likes it well cooked, tasty
and neat is a far higher type of man than he who simply
fills his stomach with baked beans, because they are nourish-
ing. It is a coarse saying: "We eat to live." Not at all.
We eat to enjoy eating and, in addition, to enjoy the bal-
ance of our existence. That eating is a somewhat vulgar,
because necessary, act need not involve its being made an act
without pleasure. Quite the contrary, taste should be culti-
vated as much as religion; we should learn to enjoy truffles
in France, kraut in Germany, shtchee in Russia, pillav in
Turkey, bird's nests in China and poy in Hawaii. As the
French, the gastronomically most cultured people say: It
is only the rustic and the horse who do not eat a thing be-
cause they see it for the first time. It is progressive to learn
to eat and enjoy everything, but not to acquire the habit of
eating much; eating much is almost always too much, dis-
turbs the balance of the body more than eating too little; a
disturbed balance means early decay; this early decay begins
to show in men between 45 and 50, in women between 36 and
45; any temperate eater will feel and look at 50 years of
age hardly older than when he was 30. There is, of course,
some difference due to activity, size, inherited traits, etc.,
but it may be said that the average man is sufficiently fed if
he eats daily 6 ounces (150 grams) of meat substance (eggs,
meat, beans, peas, etc.), 2 ounces (50 grams) of fat (butter,
oil, lard), 16 ounces (450 grams) of grain food (starch, bread,
flour, potatoes, sugar, sirup) and 8 ounces (200 grams) of
green, red or blue vegetables, distributed properly over his
3 meals. We must also never forget that, especially in food,
what one man's meat is another man's poison; everybody has
to experiment out his own best way; there are no general
rules. Some people, e. g., eat a heavy supper, go to bed al-
most immediately and live healthy and happy to an old age;
others enjoy no sleep, if they take their supper even 4 hours
before bedtime. Some eat as breakfast only a roll and some

278

hot water called tea or coffee, according to flavor; others re-
quire meat for breakfast. The work we do in the forenoon
is not supported by the breakfast; the breakfast is not pre-
pared and assimilated until perhaps late in the afternoon;
our morning's work eats up the assimilated food of yester-
day's dinner or supper.

A proper study of our food, a cultivation of our taste
will give us, together with good health, an enormous amount
of genuine legitimate enjoyment; a man with good appetite
rarely commits suicide.

The joys of smell are limited. Our sense of smell is a
vanishing one. To prove this, watch the joy of a dog when
he sees his master, approaches him, smells his boots and
all at once bursts out in a frenzy of delight; evidently the
keenest pleasure was given to the dog by the scent. We
cannot even understand that; our joys of the organ of smell
are limited to the scent of flowers, of perfumery, of "strong"
substances, but we can no longer enjoy the sweet scent of
those we love; perhaps Japanese and Chinese mothers to
whom kissing is entirely unknown, experience some such
joy when they indulge in their form of baby caresses, name-
ly, smelling their children all over and rubbing their noses
on their faces.

The sexual sense gives us through its ramification of
nerves — essentially nerves of the body — much pleasure, but
of a fleet, rather coarse and undiversified kind. This sense
is one in which the future importance is cunningly veiled
under presient sensations. Nature is not very liberal in the
sexual sense; just enough pleasure is put into it to induce
people to experiment with it; the anticipation is of far
greater intensity than the realization. The sexual sense re-
sembles those orchids which, within a large nectary, have
a lot of glands that secrete an oil of the strong odor of honey,
but not one drop of honey; they beguile numerous insects
into crawling into those nectaries, getting dusted with pollen
and carrying the pollen to another orchid, fertilizing the lat-
ter; these orchids play a vegetable game of bunco or swind-
ling on unsophisticated bees; hence, one may say crime is
here practiced by plants against insects. Similarly, the Pan-
theos of Humanity put just enough pleasure into the sense
of sex to produce a longing for more, it arranges cunningly

279

the anticipation so optimistic and grand that men and wo-
men rush into each other^s arms, only to find that while they
may have made of each other most excellent friends, have
produced charming, successful children whom they both love,
that they were caught in a game of sexual bunco as far as
the purely sexual relations are concerned. Even Solomon,
the sage of the Bible, reached the conclusion of: Vanity, all
is Vanity! referring here especially to the sexual relations.
But, as we must practice them, let us be glad for every thrill
of pleasure in it; we might have been compelled to practice
them, even if they had been as painful as childbirth; the
Pantheos of Sex — ^Venus, Aphrodite, Astarte, Phallus,
Shiva, Mary, as they are called in the various religions, is
one of the body rather than the soul; it is the blossoming
for which the body grows, most others are side issues of the
body; sex is his most vital one. Education might improve
very much this sense, but some phase of Past Pantheos, prob-
ably of Envy, certainly no progressive one, has prohibited
under the slogan: modesty, chastity, all clear spoken refer-
ence, discussion and advancement.

As to the author pure sex is rather indifferent, he does
not feel like being a martyr in its improvement and conse-
quent persecution under the various forms of tyranny prac-
ticed under the guise of postal censorship in Turkey, Russia,
China, Afghanistan, Swat, Persia, the United States, Spain,
etc.

It is desirable to retard the full outbreak of sexual vigor
in youths as long as possible, because most men become un-
teachable after that period, also because the sooner the sex
is in full activity, the sooner will it decay and with it goes
much of the vigor and joy of life in many men and even
women; almost every flirt we meet tasted sex too soon; the
author once surprised a boy and girl in Massachusetts,
neither above 8 years of age in juxtaposition; the boy is
now a fair mediocrity, the girl a society matron (!), hence
neither was ruined, but in 20 years they will pay for this
sexual precocity.

The only properly directed course of sex is toward matri-
mony and children, and from the first moment of the fall-
ing in love until the assembling of the children and grand-
children around our deathbeds the sexual relations need be

281

more by increased facilities. But, how many business men
do we meet who exhaust daily every particle of nerve force
in getting prepared for the time to enjoy life until, all at
once, the thud of the clods on the coffin is the ringing of
the gong: All out! Will they be even better prepared to
enjoy life in the next appearance if they neglected this edu-
cation? The founder of a college for gambling, amuse-
ments and pleasure will deserve many times more gratitude
than that of a new classic academy or church, of which there
is absolutely no need.

Some men are even so utterly barbaric and perverse that
they work pleasures like forced labor, coal shovelling or tree
cutting. Thus, there exist annual whist tournaments con-
ducted under rules well suited for a convocation of Trappist
monks or ancient witch-burning Puritans.

Youth is in danger of overdoing pleasure and thereby
exhausting man's capabilities too rapidly; as a consequence
most of the pleasure of adults is merely a kind of business
different from their usual one, but conducted in the same
manner; they have exhausted the pleasure capacity in their
youth. It is an old saying: prudish maiden, gay widow and
the reverse quoted above.

Intelligent people derive most of their pleasures from some
form of intellectual game; the education of our brains has
vastly increased our stock of enjoyable possibilities. The
author recalls with great satisfaction the intense nervous
glow with which he read as a boy of 10 years a great, large
book on Astronomy, full of figures, which then seemed to
be realities; he lived in Jupiter, Mars, Venus, wandered with
the comets through vast deserts of cold space, and it was
a genuine regret that log 7=0.845 . . . did not give him
any very great enjoyment. fTo enjoy brains we must culti-
vate fancy; fancy in this sense is an ability of sane dream-
ing while awake, of being able to enter as living co-operators
a play, a novel, a story, history, geography, travels; to ex-
perience the joy of battle in the Crusades without any of
the untidy bleeding, unpleasant cries of the wounded, absurd
mutilations, etc., if we want to enjoy that, we read a good
book on surgery; fancy is inherited to a great extent; how can
parents expect their children to inherit fancy if they culti-
vate nothing but dull envy.

• :

282

The keenest enjoyment of life is always nearest the danger
line to its complement of discomfiture; it adds an extra tingle
to skating to skate over ice which bends.

An entire day may depend for its spirit on little morning
practices. The author found it an excellent beginning to
seek every morning before breakfast a cause for some hearty
laughter; even if it is only a laughter at the very silliness
of laughing at nothing in particular; this laughter is the
"good morning^' from the Pantheos of Contentment and his
smiling daughter: Pleasure.

The two greatest enemies of enjoyment of life are dull-
ness and envy. True pleasure must lead to contentment,
must be just, must not be based on somebody^s pain, other-
wise we merely run in debt to Justice for our little tem-
porary fun; but it is no unfair pleasure to enjoy a mild dis-
comfiture of a pompous fraud, a ridiculous predicament with
the elements of a comedy in it; the other person would laugh
at us if we were in his place; hence, nothing unjust in this
fun.

"DonH cheer while those poor devils are dying'^ was an
excellent expression of an American sea captain at the battle
off Santiago. The discomfiture of the Spanish sailors had
gone beyond comedy or even drama, it had become violent
tragedy.

A woman frequently will have a "good cry" which does
her good; a man can only have a "dry cry," which is not
at all pleasant; weeping may give positive pleasure to women
and children; the \ension before the opening of the lachry-
mals was painful, the relief is pleasurable; frequently in great
joy men and women cry and laugh alternately, as, e. g., in
being rescued from a somewhat continued expectancy of
death as on a burning vessel. Even such an occurrence in
later life in the memory and recital, combined with the sav-
ing denouement, gives us more pleasure than pain. This
shows how our pleasure is the back-action of some pain.
Much of the joy of skating is the back-action of our falls;
those who are afraid of falling miss the joy of skating with-
out falls.

Bicycling has become a great sport in recent years; it is
estimated that over 15 millions of machines are in use among
the 200 million high grade Germanic races (English, Ameri-

283

cans, Germans). Its only danger lies in making a pleasure
the business; it will certainly produce a shallow generation,
if the youths continue to spend their allowances of money,
time and energy on bicycles for which at the end of the
year, beyond the transformation of food into mechanical
work, they have less to show in improvement of mind, busi-
ness training, learning than they formerly acquired when
spending the same potentialities (time, money, energy) for
books, apparatus, tools, etc. Some advance is gained even
by bicycles; many a woman now knows that the threads of a
bolt are coiling all in one direction, that air can be com-
pressed, etc.; the whirling through crowded streets educates
self confidence, daring; the ease of travel makes us better
acquainted with our vicinity; but it is questionable whether
the endless bicycle talk is of any real value and is not hurt-
ful by crowding out all other topics. As a source of pleas-
ure for adults, a wheel deserves its popularity; for children
its value is worse than doubtful.

Some people derive pleasure from clothes; a dainty hat,
dresses of tasty combinations are deserving objects of femi-
nine rapture, but they, of such fleet evanescent character
should only be subordinate not chief aims of life. Dress
worship in a man almost always designates what is termed
popularly an empty head; although the author frequently
observed "dudes," "coxcombs," "fops" with inborn intellects
of a genius only cultivated in an eccentric manner and domi-
neered by an overpowering general laziness. Very fre-
quently dress in men and women is used to practice chronic
swindles, to try to appear more than they are and deserve to
be considered. Supposing in the next reappearance there
should be worn no dresses. What a fix those would be in
whose highest aim in life is to be dressed well! The Beau
Bruinmels and the legion of Kag- Aniline-Tinsel worshippers
called women are just as much unharmonious devotees of the
vice of excess as a shabby, dirty, unkempt, hands unwashed
(see Bible record) Yeshua; a filthy, slovenly Buddha, a
ragged Weary Wanderer are sinners by the vice of deficiency.
The truly progressive man and woman does not worry his
essence out of himself in his hunt for the latest styles, nor
does he wish to attract undue unpleasant attention by being
too far behind the times, slovenly, untidy, etc.

" in Europe no diplomat,
lelf to appear wearing his
; lets his valet wear it a
ce of parvenuedom, e. i.,

and old, always adhering
id women deceive them-
f smart dresses elevate
emaining uncultivated in
ag; the inconsistency be-
ds us philosophers a true,

a great proportion of wit
to be ridiculous in drees,
sit leg by monstrosities in
; women of Europe and
ictually to Kaffir-notion
ture's bustle very much
shion is as plainly a phase
eauty as is PatriotiBra.
■ssive. Christians, Budd-
tterly despise fashion; in
! when harmonious. Wo-
nan if she chooses.

frequently inherited, hut
day, holiday, practice day
It is passing, let us
r its coining extinction.
100 parents who secretly
t of life more extensive

Oimningly they suppress
pleasure. Frequently in-
sting, disagreeable bores;
ich is one of Pantheism's

longing to savagedom, to
even to the mutual feel-
)f slave and master — is a
enjoyment. It is the very
asure in others. Envy is
even give any joy, elation
vely heightens the enjoy-
re we envy him, the more

285

he appreciates his "good luck/* It exists more or less in
almost all races, only in some islands of the Pacific scorn
the inhabitants to be inlierently free from it and to have ac-
quired it together with the rum, syphilis, smallpox, gunpow-
der, opium, and general perversencss from the Christians.

The ninth and tenth commandments of Moses prohibit
envy positively; the term "covet'' is an obsolete translation,
"envy" is the correct one. But in 1,500 years have the
priests been unable to eradicate it, because they cultivated
only superficial superstition, not deep improvement.

Envy exists especially strong in nations among the French
and Americans; in political groups among German socialists,
Russian nihilists, democratic party in the United States
anarchists, even among soldiers, sailors, politicians; the env}
for glory after the one-sided sea-battle off Santiago in ISDI?!
was something extremely ridiculous. There was so little
glory to distribute for the almost dangerless destruction of
some floating expensive drawing rooms and chicken coop?;
that in the scramble for glory among the army of generak
or admirals and captains and a few privates some believed
that they secured too little.

Only one great language has a single word and verb giv-
ing the opposite of envy. How do we say it in English when
we mean to express that we not only do not envy a person,
for some advantage, but are glad of his having it and rejoice
with him over his advantage? It may be seen right here
what a cumbersome circumlocution we have to use in English
for the simple German word gonnen. The German verb is
the opposite of to envy — missgonnen — it means: "I am
glad and rejoice at your good luck." What a clumsy English
form as against the usually clumsy German. Cultivate the
"gonnen " the Anglo-Saxon form of which is "to gon."

It is envy to decry the rich. It is envy to call ourselves
poor when we do not need to beg; it is envy to rave against
the power of wealth; it is envy to make all amusements in
life merely handicaps in races, to see who can beat the other;
it is envy to dictate to your neighbor by laws how he should
or should not enjoy himself; it is envy which makes mar-
riages easy, divorces difficult; it is envy that talks of Trusts,
Syndicates and Corporations as public enemies; it is envy
which causes agitators to unsettle the minds of our girls so

287

of the brilliant earner by the energy of his self-denial. Self-
denial is almost essential for the true enjoyment of life; the
self-denial of 20 years ago is to-day a source of pleasure
in our wealth. Wealth is only relative. Micawber, as created
by Dickens, voices the true philosophy of wealth and pov-
erty in his style. It is an old school boy truism that it is
not the dollar eamt that makes us wealthy, but the dollar
saved. The chief denial around the age of 18 to 30 years
for a man are woman and drinks; for a woman, fashion. A
man who feels in himself no great earning talent has to prac-
tice the saving energy. He should not marry till he has
reached certain results. With average wages (average of the
United States, $450 per man and year) he ought to save in 12
years at least $2,500, or, with interest, nearly $3,500; a tidy
sum to serve against the storms of married life. But he
ought not to invest his money in any thing that cannot be
readily turned into money again. As a rule, a man with
$3,000 and only $450 a year income should not become a real
estate speculator. Just when he wants money most, as in
panics, his real estate is worth the least. The true value of
real estate is not what the agent sells it for, but what the
bank will lend on it on first mortgage; the agent's selling
price is a fancy, individual one, and not even a true market
price. Only relatively rich men can hold city real estate;
quite different with farms; there the estate becomes the
business itself, and its value depends on the annual products
capitalized. Many people have unclear ideas about "worth,''
"market price," and "true value." It may be said a thing
is worth what I am ready to give for and what the other is
willing to sell it for; the market price is what the thing is
usually sold for; the true value what a fair pawnbroker will
lend on it or give for it. I see a watch, like it very much,
buy it and am pleased. I pay $40. That is what the watch
is worth to me in that particular transaction, because I vol-
untarily part with $40 for it. Later on I find that the same
watches are sold for $25 all over town; that is the market
price. I take mine to a fair pawnbroker and he says: "I
will give you $3 for it;" that is the true value. I am in dis-
tress and now part again from it for $1; that is now what the
watch is again worth to me. A rational man bewares of buy-
ing articles which, at the instant of transfer, immediately

; 11 111

ta^

iir.

S89

forms of back-action, and if he succeeds, even if only for
this life, he has shown himself a superior himian being de-
serving to be rich. But much more can he refine character,
morals, intellect, emotions, and enjoy life who, sailing be-
tween the degrading want of extreme poverty and the all-
absorbing detail of finance in surplus wealth, has time and
leisure left to cultivate his body and mind to their highest
individual capacity. There is not one rich man known who
has improved his mind to the level of the millions of good,
average citizens like a Darwin, Huxley, Haeckel. All the
men who have made their mark in the world of intellect,
science, inventions, art, etc., were men very often much nearer

■ ' the extreme of want than even that of moderate circum-

stances; very few wealthy men have come up even to the av-
erage of the men of mark from the middle ranks, and they

1 ought to be far in advance, considering the facilities for edu-

cation. But one has only to observe the course of the wealthy
youth from infancy to about twenty years of age to find the
solution of human progress, not within the wealthy or those
in absolute want, but within the middle classes. In the

e-^ United States these middle classes are those between $400

:r and $1,500 annual income; a person may be said to be

wealthy when the interest on his investments enables him to
live without selling his labor; hence, as, at prevailing four per
cent interest, an income of $400, enough to live well single,

A is secured from $10,000 capital; wealth may be said to begin

at about that sum; and poverty, when the annual income of
the single individual falls about below $200 a year.

1. "■•

XXVII.

THE HUMAN EQUATION".

All astronomers employ, what are called equations of the
planets in their calculation of their places thousands and
millions of years ago and thousands or millions of years to
come. These equations are long lines of x, y, s, d, and other
mathematical symbols, perfectly clear to the expert, although
perhaps meaningless to us. If the proper observations be

290

inserted into the places occupied by their respective mathe-
matical symbols, they give in terms intelligible to the ex-
pert the result asked for. As a consequence prophecy in
astronomy is as accurate a science as history; to the as-
tronomer the past, present and future are one, showing that
the deeper development of the intellect brings the future
into the present, obliterates time. The mathematical equa-
tion is treated exactly alike whether the year 22000 B. C. or
1897 A. D., or 35000 A. D., be introduced into the equa-
tion. These astronomic equations started very crudely.
Thajes, about 600 B. C, succeeded by a species of school-
boy arithmetic to predict the first eclipse of the sun; his
equation was simply

Last eclipse + 29 years = date of next eclipse.

This -was very crude, missed many, and gave too many,
but is was the start. Ta-day any eclipse can be calculated
not only to the second accurate, but all its details more ac-
curately than any event on earth; an astronomer can fore-
tell when Jupiter will occult Mars, happening only once in
1,000,000 years — a very complex calculation — within 10
seconds. Can we foretell within 2 seconds when the next
president will be inaugurated? Similar equations exist also
in some branches of physics; an expert physicist can calcu-
late the picture produced by any kind of a lense, can even
foretell the position of the magnetic needle for many years
to come; — as it is well known this needle does not always
point North and South, but fluctuates and deviates con-
siderably.

But chemistry is as yet far behind. There exist hardly
the childish beginnings of equations of the chemical ele-
ments. These equations, when once established, will allow
to calculate any chemical change or effect, any reaction or
test, without bottles or scales. When once started we have
begun to get the equation of the individusrl man. What does
this equation mean? It means that long, complex, deep for-
mula couched in terms intelligible to the expert from which,
like the astronomer to-day, he will figure the place and posi-
tion of any man at any given date in the past and for any
given time in the future. To-day no human brain is as yet
capable to even grasp the complexity of this equation; it in-

291

dudes that of the 70 elements, of some 1,200 simple and
20,000 complex chemical compounds, combined with the me-
chanical equation of his nerves, veins, muscles, bones, etc.,
combined even with that of his ancestors, with that of all
the food consumed and digested; it is a stupendous equation,
millions of times more complex than even that of a comet
wandering about between the planets. But it is not logical
to suppose that we will never know it; 20 years ago
physicists asserted air could not be liquefied! It is sure, in
this life and this constitution we have not the capacity, but
supposing only we had the electrical brains, elaborated
in chapter 6, we could do about 150 million times more
and also 150,000,000 more complex work; the equa-
tion of a comet would then appear to us less puz-
zling than now is 2x2. Might it not be the very pur-
pose of all our sciences to work out this Human Equa-
tion? And might not the deep meaning of all our scien-
tific progress be the elaborating of this equation, while the
arts aim to produce the result in actual life? This equation
known, life, youth and happiness are plainly calculable from
it, just as misery and horror are expressed between its terms.
This equation known will be an important stepping stone to
the knov/ledge of the next higher phase of Pantheos, in-
telligible to us and so on upward through countless phases
and illion ages until — ^\^'^ell, our present intellect cannot con-
ceive an until. Why do we unconsciously "intuitively" put
such a value on learning? May it not be that he who pro-
gresses most now will be the one to grasp soonest that vital,
life-giving equation and profit by it? We can hardly hope to
see within historic times the first glimmer of that time when
we will be able to visit an anthropastronomer, giving him
all our data we know, submitting to his numerous tests and
be dismissed with a: "My salary for 3 years, please, in
advance, you may then call and get the answer." If we have
asked him the proper question: "What is best for us in the
future?" we may get an answer worth millions of times the
fee. But, alas, chemists have not yet the equation of hydro-
gen, the simplest element. That great equation will be so
complex that almost every individual will only be capable
to work out his own and that of his family; hence, if we want
to know it, we had better belong to the family of one of

292

those enormously wise men. Then all our lives may be
traced from the illionth infinity of the past to that of the fu-
ture until we strike an unknown quantity belonging to a
higher phase of Pantheos not yet comprehended; for our pur-
jK)ses up to that stage this will suffice; just as for most as-
tronomical purposes the influence of the fixed stars upon
our planets is neglected to-day, but will be of importance
in the astronomy of 4000 A. D. While some of us may
elaborate that equation, all of us live it out; every hiiit or
advice which improves our lives is a dim childish guess at
the result. It is a question which equation will carry us
further, that of our bodies (John), or that of our souls (Doe),
or whether we are interested only in the present combination
as John Doe. The Ego of the soul equation will be one of
life following life, the body equation one of a succession
of developments, while only in intervals of illions of years
will the same Ego be in the same body as John Smith of 1897
and John Smith of 18,000,097. While the purely intellect-
ual anthropastronomer — now called scientific philosopher —
is working out his grand equation, applied sciences, called
arts, as practised by physicians, surgeons, physiologists, bot-
anists, chemists, architects, mechanics, apothecaries, even
down to hair dressers, anticipate some of its results. Lives
are made longer and longer, wounds fatal only 100 years ago
are to-day trifling, diseases are better and better understood,
life is made easier and more pleasant, the forces of "Nature,*^
a thoroughly Pantheistic word for Pantheos of our Earth,
are subjugated.

Strange to say, the ancient legend of the Fall of Man
has entered the reasoning of many people; they think their
ancestors to have been ever so much stronger, smarter, su-
perior to themselves. "Old fashioned^^ is one of those stupid
old language lies, with which people, — only in English
countries, in all others — except Chinese — ^the same word de-
notes a strong blemish — associate something better than
now used or made. Simple investigation will show that such
a notion as if man had retrograded in anything desirable —
from flapjacks to religion — is entirely erroneous.

Take the length of life. Church books, containing records
of births and deaths of Geneva, Switzerland, exist from 800
A. D. to the present time, and fragments even much older;

293

these show that the average of life was only 24 years in 800
A. D., 30 years in 1700 A. D., 38 years in 1800 A. D., and 52
years in 1890. In England the average in 1800 was only 35
years; it is to-day 54 years; in Berlin, 30 years in 1800, is now
52 years, etc. All over the Caucasian earth has the average
of length of life nearly doubled since 1650. There exist to-
day more centenarians per 1,000,000 inhabitants than there
were 100 or 5,000 years ago.

Even the size of the body has increased. A grave of Ro-
man soldiers was opened in Geneva, Switzerland; those buried
were part of Cesar^s legions; their average height of 5
feet 2 inches Engl. (153 cm.) is less than that of the average
Italian soldier of to-day; hence, these legions were composed
of men under military size for Germany, England, the
United States, Bussia, etc. Ancient armors have been found
large and small just as to-day certain regiments of the guards
of Prussia must be over six feet in height, some inferior
Spanish regiments have an average height of 5 feet 4
inches, while some excellent Japanese regiments have an
average of only 5 feet. The ancient Gauls, Teutons, Slavs,
appeared so large only to the puny Roman; they were prob-
ably smaller in the average than their modern descendants.
Almost any one can experience the feeling of a giant, walk-
ing the streets of a Japanese city. Modem progress has even
almost abolished size as a factor in national affairs like wars;
a 5 foot Japanese can fire as deadly a rifle as a 7 foot guards-
man.

Intellect has progressed much more rapidly; since 1790
progress has been more than from 5000 B. C. to 1790; La-
voisier^s analysis of the air, Newton's theory of gravitation,
Volta's twitching frogs, Guttenberg's printing presses, have
made the world race where it formely snailed.

Even in trifles like cleanliness have we progressed enor-
mously. As late as 1740 did Mme. de Maintenon use oint-
ments, perfumery and sachets to hide the odor of her for-
weeks-unwashed linen; no woman at all "in the swim" to-
day wears her underwear as long as a week.

Old folks frequently talk foolishly. "My mother cooked
much better; people are not as strong as they used to be,''
etc. Everybody long separated from his mother, returning
home, eats her mince pie and — ^is disenchanted. The old man

294

means only himself when he says "people." His dying stom-
ach does not relish the finest food, while that of the boy
80 years ago, hungry and unsophisticated, thought a
doughnut a perfect poem of culinary art. Mothers, at all
times and in all lands, cook better than servants, no doubt;
but, tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis — ^times
change and we change with them.

In no worthy branch has humanity gone back. Even the
retrogression in "piety," ^Hbeliefs," etc., so frequently be-
wailed by Christian priests sitting dolefully before empty
contribution boxes, is in reality a grand process of freeing
men from superstition, religious slavery, hypocrisy, mechan-
ical religion (rosary), etc.

We are getting nearer and nearer to the first term of the
Human Equation in science and arts, to bodily unlimited
life, youth, happiness, contentment. To give our non-
mathematical readers a mere outline of a very small part of
this Human Equation, we would vaguely state that the equa-
tion of the picture of the full moon in the left eye alone of
a certain man at a given moment is —

Picture of full moon in f (x, y, z,) = Equation of moon
at that time + Location of person on earth in latitude, lon-
gitude + Equation of sun at that time, + Equation of earth at
time + f (cornea) + f (lids) + f (moisture) + f (curvature)
+ f (transparency) + f (anterior chamber) + f (lense) + f iris
+ . . . . some 500 more terms. But it can be figured even quite
fairly with our present data: f (...) represents the mathe-
matical form of the words.

XXVIII.

LOGICA OF PANTHEISM.

So frequently the accusation is made against "rational-
ism" that it is merely destructive, not constructive, that we
deemed it fair under the above title to collect very few of
the positive logical conclusions which Pantheism, — a posi-
tive form of rationalism — permits of being enounced as rea-
sonable, well proved tenets or logica; they are more numer-
ous than those of any "creed."

295

Everything is Pantheos — Pantheos is everything.

All anti-poles, like God and Nature; force and matter are
blended as one in f armost Pantheos.

Pantheos is unlimited in greatness and smallness, variety,
intensity, past and future.

Pantheos consists of illions of manifestations or phe-
nomena.

A point of Pantheos is the simplest form, several points
form a line, several lines a beam of Pantheos; any specially
recognizable form following certain fixed or calculable courses
is a phase of Pantheos; the term is still better applicable
when its components are discernible, at least in part, and
also its attachment to larger phases or manifestations.

Variety of Pantheos is not yet a "phase^^ of Pantheos, be-
cause we have not yet determined the variety's place within
larger units.

Pantheic phenomena are such in which a phase appears
especially striking. Pantheistic refers only to the system of
logical deductions, the doctrine of Pantheos.

All phases of Pantheos entering man live humanly only as
they become embodied in the body or soul of man; the en-
semble of all these embodiments in all men is the humani-
fied form of existence of the phase.

All our knowledge is based upon impressions upon our and
our ancestor's senses; all our conclusions are based upon a
preponderance of evidence, very few are beyond reasonable
doubt; none beyond doubt. It is logical, reasonable and pro-
gressive to accept a strong preponderance of evidence as being
as conclusive as a personal experience. The facts or first im-
pressions upon our senses are always correct, but the transfor-
mation of these facts in our brains into thoughts is frequently
imperfect. It is not logical and progressive to ^T)elieve" any-
thing except what is logical according to our personal ex-
periences and previous knowledge, until a strong prepondera-
ting evidence compels us to accept it equal to a personal
experience; logical man is in accordance with his own time
and its state of progress. It is logical and progressive to ob-
serve a neutral state of mind towards all data of history. His-
tory is in the state of a convicted liar; events are rarely in-
vented, but the account is distorted very frequently.

The highest authority is always living man, most compe-

296

tent by reason of intellect, industry, concentration, experi-
ence, and clearness of expression. No dead person can be au-
thority, except in processes of reasoning which remain uni-
form for long periods. No ancestor government in any
phase!

Where we come from in the past is relatively immaterial.

We have existed from past Eternity.

Our nature consists of three distinctive elements, the body
and the soul, and their combination the living individual
man.

The body has manufactured for its own use the sympa-
thetic system and connected it by means of spinal and cere-
bral nerves with the soul.

Our soul has manufactured certain nerves, cells, ganglia
of the brain, spinal marrow and body, to put itself into com-
munication with the body; perhaps in the nuclei of cells and
ganglia are the soul elements.

The dynamic center of the body is the Ego of the Body.

The dynamic center of the soul is the Ego of the Soul.

The Egos may be in possession of specific microbes; with-
in these, of specific albumen compounds; within these, located
in specific chemical elements. Our chemicals, as diown by
chloride of silver, are capable of memory, of receiving im-
pression and returning impulses. (See page 144.)

Consciousness within the Egos is the elaborated conscious-
ness traceable with diminishing strength from man into
amoebae; from thence into chemicals, and from thence into
the very elements.

In its kind, every crystal has a consciousness of existence.

Our Egos of the Body and Soul and Individual are im-
mortal, — indestructible — but not uncombinable.

We feel consciousness of existence, wherever our Egos are,
only this consciousness may not be that of human beings,
until they are combined into such

We do not recall former existence because our apparatus
of recalling is too crude as yet.

All religions preach Pantheism; only for the time being
some of them emphasize sub-phases with such energy as to
overlook the general linking, the connection of all phases.

Jehovah and all other gods are real existences, composed
to-day of the brain ganglia which they control through their

297

creeds and united with each other by the ideal of their re-
ligion, ceremonies, priests; etc.; these and nothing more con-
stitute their existence and reality.

Jehovah and Jesus are not sufficiently superior to man to
be considered even as gods; they merely differ a little from
normal highest-developed rational man, but difference does
not. constitute superiority.

Brama is almost a god; almost reaching to Harmonious
Perfection.

The highest ideal of a Pantheic phase which man can now
imagine, and put as an aim, is Harmonious Perfection of
all constituents of man and of all the units, which the union
of several men can build, of our earths, suns, stars.

Pantheism, as a religion, is the first collection of ideals
which gives to the body equal consideration with the soul,
equal possibilities, an equally grand future and past.

Re-incarnations, or, better. Re-unions of souls and body
within the cycles of times occur very frequently.

Man will not gain anything by the mere process of dying;
his next future will absolutely and entirely depend on the
present existence. Even the combination of a Soul and
Body in a given man is immortal and will experience count-
less re-unions; the union of the Ego of the Body with the
Ego of the Soul, which is the Ego of Man, is a new unit and
as such will reappear in futurity; it is also combinable with
larger and smaller units.

Every man whose name is mentioned by posterity, has en-
tered into existence of a sub-god nature exactly like Je-
hovah and Jesus; he, as a dematerialized man, is living and
made up by all the ganglia of all brains in which his name
and deeds are stored as memories, and form elements of
thought; not the entire ganglia, but only the specific detail
ganglionic form of thought which concerns him.

Every molecule and atom is a world in itself, conscious in
a specific form, just as our earth is only an atom in the
molecule Cosmos.

The observation that man, even after deepest sleep, has a
faint consciousness of the duration of sleep shows, by anal-
ogy, that we are already prepared in the next reappearance
to realize faintly the interval between our present lives and
the lives to come.

298

What one day in our human lives is to our entire life, that
will be one of our human lives to our summation lives; and
what one breath is to our lives, that will be one of our lives
in the cycle of our terrestrial existence.

Time within the Pantheos of All is one single unit; even
within our Cosmos our human past is still our present;
"time'^ is a cerebral phenomenon. Intellects of all time-
rhythms exist, ours is of the terrestrial time rhythm, that of
the fall of bodies on the surface of our earth; the slowest
time rhythm connects the past with the present, the most
rapid anticipates the future.

The high intellect of the astronomer who predicts with
unerring accuracy many events to happen in the sky, proves
that the higher the intellect the more it will penetrate into
the future.

Our logically imaginable extremes are to-day the geologi-
cal brain and the gravitation brain.

Every atom, being, unit, force, is a self-purpose; they only
serve us in serving their own purposes.

Future history of man as made and determined by every
man is his fate; his destiny is the potentiality of man within
the fate of the larger phases of Panthos with which he has
identified himself.

Every phase of Pantheos needs others to reach Perfection,
but may retain its individuality and independence.

Justice is the physical principle of every action demand-
ing a back-action equal to the action, and a restored equili-
brium of both before rest and "peace" are secured; every ac-
tion leaves latent back-actions not equilibrated at the in-
stant; these delayed back-actions, in the shape of delayed
justice, enter humanity in the form of favorable circum-
stances, luck, chance, etc. We cannot reach Harmonious
Perfection before Justice is satisfied.

Liberty is the aim of the individual as a component of
larger units to retain its individuality as much as possible.

Slavery is only excusable in the form of some kind of com-
pulsory education, until the individual is fit to control him-
self in harmony with the larger unit.

Popular language voices Pantheism when it uses terms
like, "Xature," "laws," "spirit" of . . . ., "tendency" to. . . .,
etc.

299 ,

Amusements and Pleasure deserve as much cultivation and
practice as intellectuality, logics, religion and sciences.

It is progressive to accept some form of intellectual ideal
(religion) which, harmoniously to the respective intellect,
explains and connects the facts, experiences, sentiments, and
aims embodied within that intellect; rather to accept Cathol-
icism, Mahommetanism, Buddhism, Pantheism, etc., than to
retain a blank, muddled, indolent state of mind. Even if,
on a vast unexplored ocean, we sail by a wrong compass, we
will sail better, our crew will be more effective, we will learn
more by reaching some port, than if we drifted about with-
out aim, with a purposeless, demoralized crew, going hither
and thither, and surely stranding sooner or later.

The Pantheist realizes the true scale of phases — as out-
lined in chapter 8 — and regulates his acts by reference
to their importance.

Every act in the service of lower phases, hurtful to the
higher phase, is a "sin,^' namely, a shortcoming, (4-or — )
of some ideal.

A lie is a sin (+or — ) committed by our means of ex-
pressing thought.

The aim of science is the Human Equation; of applied
science, the realization of Harmonious Perfection within our
realm; of arts, the highest actual development of all our
present possibilities; the final aim of our religious lives and
thoughts is to connect ourselves consciously with higher and
more complex phases of Pantheos while bringing within our-
selves more and more lower ones to a harmonious conscious
existence; that of our political, aspirations is to produce Har-
monious Perfection within the units composing nations,
tribes, races and continents.

All phases of Pantheos, themselves invisible to our physi-
cal eyes, are composed of the equally invisible manifesta-
tions of which we can only see the final results. Thus, we
cannot see attraction, cannot see how it works, but we can
see the stone fall to the ground, can see the moon revolve
about our earth; these visible phenomena are our visible
realization of the invisible Pantheos of Gravitation of which
ihe Pantheos of Attraction is the real invisible source.

All force is some matter in motion; no other kind of force
is known to us.

INDEX.

Action equals back action, 101;

Cliapt. XXVI, 264.
Advantage of Pantlieism, 108,

109.
Alphabet, 214.

International, 222, 223.
Anarchists, 111.
ANIMALS AND PLANTS,

Chapt. XVI, 164 et sea.
Arithmetical absurdities, 200,

201.
Ascension of Jesus, 29.
Axioms of physic-pantheistic

logica, 101.
Battle-attitude, 181.
Battle of CannsB, 190.
Beings on stars, 113.
Belief, 7, 136.
Believers, dead, 19.
BI^LE, Chapt. Ill, 21 et seq.
Biblical names, 31.
Bicycling, 282.
Bigotry, 252.

Billion insanity, 201, 202.
BLASPHEMY AND REVER-
ENCE, Chapt. II, 15 et seq.
BRAINS, Chapt. V, 41 et seq.
BRAINS OF VARYING

SPEEDS, Chapt. VI, 67 et seq.
Brains harmoniously perfect,

106.
Cannon ball, 269.
Census frauds, 211.
Children, 263.
Christianity, 20, 21.
Chronology suggested, 206.
Church sociable, 263.
Cigarets, 263.
Cimex, 170.

Complex brain action, 61.
Confederacy, 107.
Conscious contentment, 109.
Consciousness, 106.
Constitution U. S., 199.
DEATH, Chapt. XII, 141 et seq.
Dentistry, 176.
Destiny, 77, 115, 127.

Development, 15.

Dog, 168.

DREAMS, Chapt XV, 157 et

seq. 159, 160.
Dual system, 187.
Dullness, 284.

Dying believers, 130, 131, 132.
Dynamic center, 81.
Earth vs. Pantheos of Earth,

246.
EGO, Chapt. VII, 178 et seq.
Electric Brains, 69.
Embryology, 226.
Envy, 285, 286.
EVOLUTION, 15, Chapt. XXI.

223 et seq.
Eternity of past, 134.
Fact, 6.
Fads, 115.

FAITH, Chapt. XI, 136 et seq.
FAMILY, Chapt. XXII, 231 et

seq.
Family ideal, 233, 234.
Fasting, 111.
Fashion, 283.
Fate, 76, 126.
Fire and Justice, 270.
Flood of Noah, 39.
Free will, 149.
Ganglia, 42, 53, 55.
Geological brains, 70.
Geometry synthet., 112.
Ghosts, 119.
God, 14, 16, 17.
Gravitations brains, 70.
Harmonious Perfection, 196.
HEROES, Chapt. XVI, 172 et

seq.
Holy Ghost, 33, 107.
Humanity, 102, 103, 184.
HUMAN EQUATION, Chapt.

XXVII, 289 et seq.
Ignis fatuus, 119.
Immunity, 257, 258.
Infidel, 44.
INSANITY IN NATIONS,

Chapt. XIX, 195 et seq.

301

302

INDEX.

Insane ancestor worship, 197,

198.
JEHOVAH, Chapt. IV, 36 et

seq.
Jehovah, 66, 110, 120, 121, 122,

123.
Jesus. 27, 28, 41, 42, 120 to 124.
John Doe. 82. 89, 92. 146.
Joys of Senses, 275 to 280.
JUSTICE, Pantheos of, Chapt.

XXV, 264 et seq., 106.
Kipling, R., 158.
LANGUAGE, Chapt. XX, 212

et seq.
Law, 115, 252, 253.
LIBERTY, Chapt. XXIII, 245

et seq., 107, 247.
Lie, 191 to 193.
Life of gods, 120.
Logarithms, 26.
Logic, 14, 50.
LOGICA OF PANTHEISM,

Chapt. XXVIII, 294 to 300.
Love, 63.
Mahometans, 109.
Map-frauds, 208.
Mars, Planet, 102.
Martyrs, 175.
Memory, 52.

Memory of chemicals, 144.
Microbes, 260.
MIGRATION OF SOULS,

DREAMS, Chapt. XV, 157 et

seq.
Mind, 14, 102.
Mississippians, 256.
Nightmares, 160-161.
Originality, Heroes, Martyrs,

Chapt. XVII, 172 et seq.
Pain and Pleasure, 271.
PANTHEOS AND PANTHE-
ISM, Chapt. VIII, 95 et seq.
Pantheos of Development, 102,

103.
Harmonious Perfection, 108.

Contentment, 109.
Pantheos of Justice, Chapt.
XXV, 140 et seq.

Family, 176.

Quantity and Size, 102, 103.

Earth, 246.
Parsee religion, 110.

PHASES OF PANTHEOS,

Chapt. IX, 119 et seq.
Pi, 204, 205.
POWER OF FAITH, Chapt.

XI, 136 et seq.
Prayer, 65.
Preface, 1 and 2.
PREVENTION OR CURB?

Chapt. XXIV, 254 et seq.
Prohibition of Liquor, 260 et

seq.
PROCESSES OF REASONING,

Chapt. I, 5 et seq.
Psychium, 86.
PURPOSES OF PANTHEISM,

Chapt. X, 129 et seq.
Reading, 56, 57, 58.
Reasoning, Chapt. I.
Religion, 64.
Satan, 123, 124.
Scent, 117.
Sin, 15.

Slavery, 242, 243.
Smith, A. C. L., 184.
Somine, 86.
Soul, 80, 81, 14.
Stars, 113.
Success, 286, 287.
SUICIDE, Chapt. XIIX, 148.
Talent, 173.
Thought, 48, 49.
Time, 72.
Tradition, 25.
Translations, 217.
Tricks, 11.
Trinity, 107, 35.
TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD,

Chapt. XVIII, 186 et seq.
Tuberculosis, 256.
Virgin Mary, 190.
Vice and Virtue, 111.
Vigintillion, 205.
Wealth, 288, 289.
WHAT MAKES LIFE WORTH

LIVING? Chapt. XXVI. 274.
WILLARD, MISS, Chapt. XIV,

152.
Windbags, 12.
W. C. T. U., 152, 153.
World's Language, 217, 218,

219.
Youth, 282.

CORRECTIONS.

Modern type-setting machines necessitate throwing out an
entire line for one correction ; as a consequence, several hun-
dred omitted or superfluous commas had to be passed, but the
following are sense-destroying errors, to be corrected :

10, foot note, read 170O instead of 1800.

37, line 30, read "functionally" instead of "exactly".

58, " 1, "— 4 " should be — L.

59, " 16, " s " should be i3.

The printing house had no Greek type or type-setter who
knew Greek, only a few random slugs were found and ran-
domly inserted.
62, " 10, " Twelve billions" should be twelve thousand millions.
71, brain and brains are used indiscriminately.

78, " 12, printer had no integral sign, used a Greek S (2).
86, " 13, in formula for man an I should be in center instead of

small t.

91, " 33, read " supposititious " instead of "suppositions".

92, " 25, insert " in " after " consists ".

94, " 29, no sense in using " " before a proper name.

97, " 13, omit comma before to us.

97, " 15, omit " s " in " illions ".

116, periods after " per cent." are uniformly omitted.

119, " 30, read " 9000 " instead of " 4000 ".

123, " 17, read 1347 instead of 1440.

129, " 2, read 1400 instead of 140.

142, " 8, the printer thought of Buffalo Bill when setting " Busy

Bill " instead of " Busy Bee".

150, " 24, read " may be " instead of " many ".

155, " 38, no sense in use of ( ); omit.

161, " 37, read " prodigiosus " instead of " prodigious ".

185, " 13, read 1300 instead of 1400.

185, " 28, read 1347 instead of 1447.

197, " 41, omit per cent.

199, " 9, read " minority" instead of " majority".

200, " 20, read " comma " instead of " period ".

204, " 23, printer had no Greek p (tt); used the omega (w) instead.
208, 309, 210, cuts were much finer and cleaner; stereotyping spoiled

them.
214, line 7, read , instead of " by".
219, " 24, in^ert " , " after ; " for ".
222, " 18, 2 (Swedish)— Engl. aw.
222, " 20, insert 1 for i and 6 for o.
261, " 23, read " are " instead of " is ".
268, " 37, read " it " instead of " us ".
275, foot note, "only" to be omitted.
280, line 18, read "mates" instead of " friends ".
285, " 23, omit " it " after say.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Pantheism: The Light and Hope of Modern Reason"

See other formats